On Marxism, capitalism, and Latin America

Posted: 27 February 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , ,

Here’s the link to an interview conducted last October at the University of Nottingham by Chris Hesketh for Ceasefire Magazine.

4. When you say the cuts aren’t necessary what do you mean by that?

Very simply, if you changed the modes of taxation you could fully support the existing social services, and education and policing and all of these other things. You could even expand them. So, the cuts are not necessary. They are only necessary when viewed from the standpoint of a particular conception of capitalism.

So, here’s what always happens: they hold taxation constant, so the only way to balance the budget is by cutting expenditures. But you don’t have to hold taxation constant. There is a lot of surplus out there. One of the things I think a Marxist would put on the agenda is the question of the surplus. Who gets it, and once they get it, how is it distributed and how much of it can be taxed to support social programs? If in fact we believe there is such thing as society, then social needs can be funded from the surplus.

The second question is, what is not being put on the agenda? The current debate is all about budgetary expenditures and revenues, it is ‘don’t tax the rich, don’t tax the corporations’. That is one side of it. It is ‘screw the poor and screw the working class’ in terms of social programs, and that is true of both the Keynesians and the neoclassicals.

But they also don’t want to ask anything about the enterprise, for example. They don’t want to put on the agenda — the idea that, the people who actually do the work, who produce the surplus, might be allowed to have some control over appropriating and distributing the surplus? And I think that is one of the things we need to do. There is this wide-ranging discussion about the conditions of society and yet this other aspect of society is left off the agenda entirely. I think we need to put that on the agenda, and from what I see it is beginning to be put on the agenda.

Comments
  1. D. G. Bokare says:

    Labor creates surplus value but share it with the owner and sleeping (non-working) shareholders. This is the greatest tragedy of capitalism. Why should the non-working shareholders share the surplus value created by workers with their own hard work?
    Secondly, we have never tested ‘free market’ anywhere in the world during the last two centuries, though everyone talks about practicing it across the capitalist systems. This is pure and simple disinformation. Capitalism and free market cannot go together.
    Thirdly, interest charges on capital supplies is nothing but exploitation of needy persons by rich persons. Capitalism cannot live without interest, free market and sharing surplus value of working class.
    Thus, we need to accept a new civilization based on pure free market, zero-interest on loans and deposits and retaining surplus value by producing workers themselves. Since capitalism is now counting the days before collapse, the alternative based on the above fundamentals is the only option before mankind. We have developed the economic theory on this basis in 1993. This is universally applicable as an alternative to Marxism and capitalism. First one has already proved utopian and the latter one is now on the verge of collapse. Discussion and debate are already taking place on this alternative. This is totally eco-friendly.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s