joe 91
5th April 2007, 14:48
Friedman and Pinochet: an appreciation
By Martin Joyce, February 2007
What is commonly referred to as ‘the market economy’ is, in fact, largely planned. The important questions are: Who will do the managing? For whose benefit? What will be the goals? Who will set them? How?. To these questions, the ruling classes answer ‘us, and us alone’; we answer: ‘everyone’.
Introduction
In this article, I will be arguing that what is commonly referred to as ‘the market economy’ is, in fact, largely planned; that modern industrial society, as a point of technological necessity, has to be largely planned and not subject to market forces. This point has been made by leading figures in economics, business history and political science for one hundred years, but is not presently acknowledged within mainstream economics. Free-market theory and ideology —‘neo-liberal’ ideology—serves the purposes of equating capitalism with freedom; of equating all alternatives with authoritarianism and/ or impracticality; and of obscuring the reality that control over the economy lies not in the market, but in the hands of narrowly concentrated private economic power. A truly free-market economy is incompatible with the modern industrial economy, what the American historian Michael Hogan calls ‘corporative neo-capitalism’, and so to talk of ‘liberalising’ it or reverting to the market is essentially meaningless: unless we wish to revert to a hunter-gatherer society, conscious economic planning is a necessity, and always has been. True progress, therefore, lies not in turning to the market, but in moving beyond both corporative neo-capitalism and state socialism—both forms of coercive, undemocratic, top down hierarchy—by placing the economy under genuinely democratic, popular control from the bottom up. The ‘neo-liberal’ initiative of the past 30/35 years was intended to prevent exactly this from happening, by strengthening the position of capital over labour ...
Full Article (http://www.iwca.info/cutedge/Friedman_Pinochet.pdf)
Its a bit of a mission the whole article but essentially it argues the 'Free Market' is in reality controlled and supported by direct state intervention and interference, much like state socialism, but in the favour of corporations and the rich instead of the masses. Any thoughts, comments etc.
By Martin Joyce, February 2007
What is commonly referred to as ‘the market economy’ is, in fact, largely planned. The important questions are: Who will do the managing? For whose benefit? What will be the goals? Who will set them? How?. To these questions, the ruling classes answer ‘us, and us alone’; we answer: ‘everyone’.
Introduction
In this article, I will be arguing that what is commonly referred to as ‘the market economy’ is, in fact, largely planned; that modern industrial society, as a point of technological necessity, has to be largely planned and not subject to market forces. This point has been made by leading figures in economics, business history and political science for one hundred years, but is not presently acknowledged within mainstream economics. Free-market theory and ideology —‘neo-liberal’ ideology—serves the purposes of equating capitalism with freedom; of equating all alternatives with authoritarianism and/ or impracticality; and of obscuring the reality that control over the economy lies not in the market, but in the hands of narrowly concentrated private economic power. A truly free-market economy is incompatible with the modern industrial economy, what the American historian Michael Hogan calls ‘corporative neo-capitalism’, and so to talk of ‘liberalising’ it or reverting to the market is essentially meaningless: unless we wish to revert to a hunter-gatherer society, conscious economic planning is a necessity, and always has been. True progress, therefore, lies not in turning to the market, but in moving beyond both corporative neo-capitalism and state socialism—both forms of coercive, undemocratic, top down hierarchy—by placing the economy under genuinely democratic, popular control from the bottom up. The ‘neo-liberal’ initiative of the past 30/35 years was intended to prevent exactly this from happening, by strengthening the position of capital over labour ...
Full Article (http://www.iwca.info/cutedge/Friedman_Pinochet.pdf)
Its a bit of a mission the whole article but essentially it argues the 'Free Market' is in reality controlled and supported by direct state intervention and interference, much like state socialism, but in the favour of corporations and the rich instead of the masses. Any thoughts, comments etc.