>From: Self <<shaunk.HURONAC>
>To: 3way@netnexus.org
>Subject: On an eonomics for the third way
>Date sent: Fri, 7 Aug 1998 15:35:32 +0
>
>I would like to offer the following thoughts on Social Economics as a
>contribution to the formulation of a theoretically coherent economics
>for a Third Way. At the heart of Social Economics lies the
>principle/concept of the non-antagonistic production system. In
>Section 1 I elucidate this as and within an analytic framework. In
>Section 2 I apply it.
>
I strongly agree in principle with the author's views and I believe that
all the material I've read about the so-called "Third Way" ignores the
current and overarching structural problems with the current relations
and modes of production. To put it more succinctly, the underpinning
assumption throughout the material is that government can do little to
protect (a dirty word these days) its citizens from the predatory nature
of international Capital.
Adorno, and in particular, the comprehensive re-reading and defense of
Adorno by Jarvis (1998), provides a penetrating perceptual framework for
assessing the problems riddling global capitalism:
1. All social relations are now reduced to exchange-values, hence they
are commodified, petrified, and subsumed to the commodity fetish. The
so-called centre-Left is, by unquestioningly accepting the exchange-value
view of social relations, is given to looking like Neo-Liberals and
Neo-Conservatives with a "touchy-feely" paint job. Some of the material
even hinges on Libertarian tenets, and so does not belong in any
discussion of Leftist politics.
If we are to put a price - any price - on social "goods", such as water,
health, education, welfare, crime prevention, child protection, etcetera,
etcetera, we cannot hope to solve the problems that face us: These things
are beyond price and are most certainly not best served by abstract,
unaccountable, and socially irresponsible "market forces".
2. The mode of production is now almost entirely abstracted from anything
in material reality (as D. Coyle inevitably, if not gleefully, points
out). That is, in excess of 99 percent of global trade is carried on in
the speculative currency and trading markets. Of the one percent
remaining, one-third is constituted by arms trade, mostly to third-world
countries who use loans to buy the arms. We are, as a result, faced with
hyperinflation. The system is, therefore, on the verge of complete
collapse. I have no hesitation in saying so.
It's worth noting that Marx never considered Capital as a "thing", or
even a collection of things or persons, but rather, 'a social system of
production' (Capital, Vol 3, pp. 822-830).
I recently had a comprehensive paper published that addresses the second
issue I outline above. If anyone wishes to see a copy of it, please email
me and I will happily forward an unedited copy in Word 7 or RTF. The
paper was published in "The Australian Rationalist" Issue 46, 1998 pp.
15-21. Please indicate the format you require when requesting the
paper.
The reference to Jarvis's re-reading of Adorno is:
Jarvis, S. (1998). <italic>Adorno: A critical introduction</italic>.
London: Polity.
I highly recommend it for anyone interested in the fatalistic
deterioration of Leftist thought due to the primacy of
exchange-value-based social relations.
On a final note, I draw attention to the historical naissence of Third
Way politics: Mussolini's policies were called Third Way, as were Oswald
Moseley's, as were Hitler's (among other European fascist leaders of the
early-mid 20th C). The book, "The Third Reich", was also initially titled
"The Third Way" (See Eatwell, R. [1996]. <italic>Fascism: A
history</italic>. London: Vintage). With this in mind, I suggest that the
authors of the so-called "Third Way" re-badge, if not rethink, their
political package.
I'm not suggesting that the authors of "Third Way" are fascists, but they
might, by accepting the primacy of speculative international finance, dig
a hole where fascism fits. This is happening in Australia (See the rise
of the One Nation Party), and it appears, that due to corporate sector
manipulation of government policy, the same may happen, indeed may
already be happening, in Europe.
Let's not forget that Capital is predatory. It preys on labour; it preys
on citizens for its growth. Fascism sought to bundle together people in
corporate blocs under the assumption that this would be the best for
business and governance. The role of government is to protect its
citizens so that they might prosper, not to facilitate businesses who
will, in almost any environment, inevitably flourish.
Cheers,
Phil Graham
Student
Queensland University of Technology
-------------------------------------------------------------
Posted to 3way, a service of Nexus. http://www.netnexus.org/
Hosting and email provided by new media consultants On-Line Publishing