Log in

View Full Version : Ticktin 1 mandel 0 - Fundamental considerations



peaccenicked
15th February 2002, 11:25
From a debate with Cleaver
"HILLEL TICKTIN: When looking at the present capitalist crisis it appears to me that there are four aspects to it. Since it's not possible for me to go into any detail in twenty minutes I am just going to have to assume that people have some understanding of certain of the concepts. So in the first instance it seems to me we are talking about the long wave and a long term downturn that began roughly in 1973. My view of the long wave is not the same as Ernest Mandel who most people would identify with it. I'd see it much rather in a kind of classical way which underlies what I am going to say and might differentiate me, I'm not at all certain, from the other speaker.

That is to say, if one looks at the movement of history in marxist terms, there are always two aspects to it: the movement in the categories themselves and the class struggle. And it seems to me the art or duty of the marxist is to be able to put the two together correctly to see how, in fact, the form of the class struggle is merging with movement of the categories. If one simply analyses the movement of the class struggle you will not understand the history. All you do is end up with an amount of empirical detail, which is useful but which will not really give you a proper understanding of the nature of the economic system or movement. So one has to understand the categories. In other words, in this instance, one has to understand what is happening to value, to accumulation. Now the difference I think that I have with Mandel here is that Mandel looks at it in a much more technical way and would place much more accent effectively on accumulation and technological change. I don't. For me the long waves are much more to do with changes which are related to accumulation which in turn is related to the class struggle itself"

peaccenicked
15th February 2002, 12:07
more criticism of mandel
(Acronyms:TRPF tendency of the rate of profit to fall
LOV Law of value) from anon net article
"Mandel's definition of late capitalism shows how the dynamics of production call forth the emphasis on consumption that accounts for a post-modern cultural turn. In fact he incorporates production and consumption factors in his multi-causal theory of crisis. Thus the third technological revolution brings with it a rising organic composition, higher productivity and the pressure to realise this expanding output as consumer commodities. But Mandel abandons the strict determination of the TRPF so there is no clear causal link between crises in production and consumption/culture. The TRPF becomes contingent upon the falling rate of profit at the level of the market rather than a necessary feature of the law itself.72 Therefore the LOV is present as a premise but is not clearly implicated as a 'law' that causes the TRPF. The correspondence between the inherent dynamics of 'late capitalism' and culture is not specified. Crisis results not from necessity but from contingency.73 This opens up the way for the concept of 'late capitalism' to become 'post-capitalism'.74 Thus a new technological revolution –the information society or ‘knowledge’ economy –posits the indefinite expansion of commodity production based on the fantastic productivity growth of information technology. Mandel's theory would say that rising organic composition will be offset by rising surplus-value until a "certain threshold" is reached in the market when workers resist further increases.

Yet this possibility is excluded by Marx in the framing of the TRPF as the cheapening of C and V and other counter-tendencies can never be sufficient to offset the formula s/C+V.75 Thus Mandel’s introduction of this revision opens the way for a post-marxist rejection of the necessity of crisis at the level of production, and for a much weaker theory of the possibility of crisis that can be expressed in exchange, distribution, consumption, and what is fashionable today –circulation! The complex unity of the circuit –production,exchange,distribution,consumption – is broken allowing even the ‘cultural turn’ of post-marxism to fixate on the politics of identity a la Jameson.76"