Well we know how that schoolboy rhyming smut ended. As to the Occupation, that too, had a tragi-comical edge. Marxman shares his thoughts on those events: Occupy London and Misunderstanding Capitalism by imarxman The forcible closure of the “Occupy London” camp outside St. Paul’s Cathedral in the London Square Mile was followed next day (Tuesday, 28th February 2012) by a phone-in on Radio 5Live. What emerged from the usual point scoring swapping of entrenched ideas was a general lack of understanding of what capitalism is. A number of callers professed to be in favour of capitalism rather than the corporate system which, for them, is the source of all the world’s woes. It transpired that what they meant by capitalism was a vague sense of people working hard and getting on to make life comfortable for themselves and their families. These are laudable aspirations, but they have little or nothing to do with capitalism. Although it is often portrayed by its advocates as the medium of opportunity, capitalism actually has only one purpose, the accumulation of profit. All other attributions are mere persiflage. What hadn’t occurred to the 5Kive callers, apparently, was that the corporate bodies they were objecting is capitalism. The economic crisis wasn’t caused by greedy bankers who were merely the instruments on this occasion. Economic crisis is as fundamental an aspect of capitalism as the occasional booms. Even if bankers, financiers and their corporations are more strictly regulated, and tax avoidance schemes curtailed, there will still be economic crises in the future. As long as capitalism exists this will be the case and the ordinary people, the workers, will be made to pay the price. As stated above, the one and only motivating factor in capitalism is the pursuit of profit. The only source of profit is the surplus value created by workers who receive less in wages and salaries than is made through their work. In the early days of capitalism, the Industrial Revolution, this relationship was stark and obvious: the mill owner owned the factory and machines while the workers owned nothing but their own labour. The factory and machines were, of course, quite useless in themselves, needing the workers’ labour to operate. Similarly, a worker’s labour was only of value if traded in return for pay with which to buy the means of life. The deal was, part of a worker’s shift created enough value to cover wages, the other part of the shift produced extra value not needed to sustain the worker. This was surplus value from which, once other expenses were drawn, the capitalist took profit. By obviously owning the means of production, the factories and machines, capitalists could exploit the necessary labour of the work force by paying less than the value produced. Capitalism, however, became ever more complex: the means of production, technology, continued to advance but this made it increasingly expensive. Capitalism required funds beyond the resources of individuals, so the baking system and financial institutions developed to meet the need. Before 1900, manufacturing was being surpassed by finance capitalism; the bankers were taking control. In Britain, workshop of the world in the 1850s, manufacturing went into absolute decline, a process becoming more pronounced throughout the twentieth century. The Thatcher government of 1979 marked the state’s recognition of the strategic importance of finance capitalism. All subsequent governments have been reliant on, and actively promoted, the financial sector at the expense of indigenous manufacturing. Living standards were apparently allowed to rise, but this was not because the vast majority of Britons, the workers, became evermore richer. Rather they were encouraged to enjoy the benefits of financial instruments. That is, they were encouraged into debt. Even a pathway to a possibly more prosperous life through higher education became subject to borrowing. People had mortgages, car finance, student loans, credit cards et al. Many thought this was unsustainable: they were correct. None of this creates a single pound (or euro) of value. People were apparently becoming wealthier without generating any more wealth: although bankers may have been drawing the largest sums, everyone, to some degree was complicit. It was easier to believe promises of easy wealth than confront the very much greater task of rebuilding Britain through manufacturing, agriculture, developing the infrastructure to benefit all. Occupy London has been tagged as anti-capitalist, but this remains little more than a vague notion. However genuine the protesters were, no matter how grievous their grievances, it seems they lacked any real understanding of what they were against. And even vaguer about what they favoured as an alternative. Their supporters who called the phone-in stitched together, unfairness, child poverty, climate change and any other single issue exercising them. When asked what they’d put in capitalism’s place they floundered even more. Idealism has a double meaning: firstly, there is the altruistic motivation to make the world a better place in some undefined fashion. Secondly, it is the belief that if only people thought in a certain way, in this case more humanely, then society would change for the better. Were that it was it so simple! Such is no more than a starting point, recognition that something is profoundly wrong. Then begins the much greater challenge of discovering the material reality, understanding how it functions and coming to terms with what is to be done to change it. There are no easy solutions; the working class, that is the vast majority of people in Britain, need to become active participants in formulating their own futures. The exploitative nature of early capitalism caused the workers to establish their trade unions to defend and promote their interests. So it must be again. However worthy, camping on cathedral steps will change nothing. It hardly disconcerts capitalism for a moment. Initial press interest dies away and it seems likely that before the evictions of the protesters from their camp most people in the country had forgotten they were there. The British state has learned patience: no need for heavy handed policing while the pedestrian tread of the law allows time to pass and the protesters to become isolated from society. An eventual court ruling and a quick and efficient police operation with minimal arrests and the City carries on speculating undisturbed. Those who style themselves anti-capitalist must learn the lesson that every act is a political act and if they are really serious then they must develop their political understanding. Otherwise they are just another bubble to be burst. http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rc..._HCj5TGHTWIPtA ***************
Good article, comrade.
