Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Part 5 of 6: The Political-Economic "Law of Motion" of Modern Society



Dear Readers,

Below is part 5 of my 6-part serialization of the Equitist Advocacy group’s essay "The Political-Economic Law of Motion of Modern, Capital-Based Society -- The 'Sociotaxis' Toward [State-]Capitalist Totalitarianism as Political-Economic Attractor".

As with my previous serialization, here, of their "Malady and Remedy" manifesto, I have felt free to add to and/or to re-write portions of the text which I feel need updating, or other improvement(s).

The Equitist Advocacy group’s original essay can be accessed via the following URLs --

http://equitism.org/Equitism/Equitism-entry.htm

http://www.equitism.org/Equitism/Theory/Theory.htm

http://www.equitism.org/Equitism/Theory/PoliticalEconomicLawOfMotion/PoliticalEconomicLawOfMotion.htm



Regards,

Miguel




The Political-Economic "Law Of Motion" of Modern, Capital-based Society --

The 'Sociotaxis' to State-Capitalist, Humanocidal Totalitarianism as 'Political-Economic Attractor'



Part 5 of 6:  The Capitalist Ruling-Class Origins of the 'Pro-Decadence Ideologies' of 'Zeroism'/'''Negativism''', of "Neo-Primitivism", and of "Eco-Fascism" --

'Capitalist Anti-Capitalism'


Hypothesis
The divide-and-conquer dis-information that the 'Meta-Nazi's' hired liars dish out for public consumption — for consumption by the majority, producing population — is not the same content as that which these intellectual prostitutes tell their masters behind closed doors.

Suppose a dominant faction of the capitalist plutocracy — the faction that we have named the 'Meta-Nazis' — were to conclude that Marx was right?

 
Suppose that faction concluded that Marx was essentially right, in that the continued growth of the "productive forces", i.e., of human-societal self-productivity; the continued advancement of science, technology, and the technical composition of capital, motivated via the competitive-capitalist pursuit of transient relative surplus-value super-profits, with the concomitant increases in the technical composition of labor, in working-class education-levels, skill-levels, wages-levels, standards of living, standards of health, and of disposable time, would, at length, produce a world ungovernable by them; a world no longer susceptible to their "invisible" tyranny; a world in which their "perks", their lives of "privilege" — their lives of pillage, torture, rape, and mass murder — would no longer be possible or tolerated; a world in which continued, accelerating scientific/technological advancement would 'techno-depreciate' the accumulated capital-value of their hyper-concentrated fixed-capital assets, the foundation of their socio-politico-economic power [e.g., consider the impact of the invention of 'water-burning' fusion power reactors on the capital-value of the capitalist plutocracy's petroleum capital-properties].

Would they then come to believe that the continued growth of the social forces of production is their greatest enemy?

Would they, globally, but secretly, declare war on the continued growth of the social forces of production, and of the global interdependency of the world market which inherently accompanies it, in favor of "[re-]localism"?

Would they then embark upon a massively-funded, global ideological and physical campaign of reversing the growth of the productive forces?
 
Of proclaiming "An Era of Diminished Expectations"?

Of proclaiming that "Small Is Beautiful" — especially in the form of drastically reduced, 'medievally' "small", standards of living; of "austerity", and of a draconianly "small" share in social wealth for the producing majority [but not, of course, for them]?

Of proclaiming "Limits to Growth", and arguing for "Zero" [i.e., Negative] Economic Growth", and especially for "Zero [i.e., Negative] Population Growth"?

Of attacking science, technology, and the very idea of progress as "bad for the biosphere"?
Would they concoct a "Global Warming" hysteria to "justify" a hyperinflation of their oil prices and a catastrophic contraction in majority living standards — a global depression, of catastrophically-contracting social reproduction?

Would they therefore also contrive to reverse the growth of human population, which is, itself, the central moment of the growth of the social forces of production, and which is the necessary support for the growth of the human social forces of production in its other moments. 

Would they concoct a "People are Pollution" ideology to get the public to "look the other way" as they commit stealth genocide throughout the "Third World", through engineered famines, Black-Ops-orchestrated, arms-exports-fueled civil wars and civil strife, genomically-engineered "designer diseases" like AIDS, etc., etc.?

Would they fund the creation of the new, replacement "antagonistic cooperation" of "fundamentalist" pseudo-Christian, theocratic totalitarian, anti-feminist movements in the core, with "fundamentalist", pseudo-Islamic theocratic totalitarian anti-feminist movements [e.g., via the Wahhabist Madrasahs, funded, under core plutocracy orders, by the oil money of the Saudi Arabian branch of the global "Dictatorship of Petroleum"] in the periphery, so as to reflate the Military-Industrial Complex and massive deficit spending for "defense" after the collapse of the former system of "antagonistic cooperation", i.e., the collapse of the formerly "defense"-spending-justifying Stalinist "opposition" in the USSR and the PRC?

Would they then — as the next stage in their game-plan — utilize the staged antagonism between the two to "justify" the roll-back of civil liberties, the de facto repeal of representative-democratic constitutions, and dis-assembly of democratic institutions, and the assembly of the infrastructure of totalitarianism [e.g., the KGB-modeled "Department of Homeland Security"], to purchase vast quantities of “dum-dum” bullets, ostensively to "fight foreign fundamentalist terrorism", but really to be directed domestically, against the people of the advanced, core-capitalist countries, when the time came, according to their '''timetable to totalitarianism''', for a more open totalitarian state-terrorization of those core societies, as a key component of the Meta-Nazi's imposition of contracted social reproduction/productive forces contraction world-wide?

If so, then all of these "War On Terror" machinations within the U.S. are but cover and preparation for a "War on America", and, in truth, for a global "War on Humanity".

All of these machinations are cover for the new, second, global "Great Depression" that the 'Meta-Nazis' have been preparing to unleash upon the peoples of the world.

The last global "Great Depression" that the 'Meta-Nazis' arranged, in the 1930s, in the first debut of their — by now tried and true — '''bubble engineering''' technology -- perhaps first developed and tested by obediently Hitler-lauding, and democracy-deriding, lower-plutocracy servant-family patriarch Joseph Kennedy -- failed to bring about the global 'fascistization' that they had intended.

Hitler, the Meta-Nazis' erstwhile servant-despot, who they had so lavishly financed into power, with the help of the progenitors of the Bush family, among others, turned into a '''Franken-dictator''', turn-coat turning against them, his masters in the West.

Hitler's intent was to replace his masters with himself, to seize the totality of global social power for himself alone [thus, Hitler's temporary peace pact with Stalin, the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, signed a week before Hitler’s armies invaded Poland, launching World War II as his war with his ‘Meta-Nazi’ erstwhile masters] to put off the inevitable eventual Hitler-Stalin showdown until later — until Hitler had first dispatched his Meta-Nazi former masters in the U.K. and in the U.S.].

This, their "betrayal" by Hitler, aborted the Meta-Nazis' plan — for a global totalitarianism under their sole control — the last time around.

The Meta-Nazis were forced to ally with and ship supplies to Russian Stalinism, and to permit the Rooseveltean, "New Deal" concessions to the U. S. producing class, in order to enlist those two forces — which they had earlier targeted, in the former case, for elimination [the Meta-Nazi designed, ‘‘‘eugenocide’’’ plan « Generalplan Ost », and the original “Operation Barbarossa ”, to have been carried out by their servant-dictator Hitler], and, in the latter case, for totalitarian subjugation, at best — i.e., in order to harness both of these forces to save the Meta-Nazis’ asses from Hitler's global onslaught.


But now, since 1989, with both Hitlerism and Stalinism out of the way, the Meta-Nazis have, "at last", felt ready to try again!

The new Meta-Nazi-engineered global asset prices "bubble", now in the process of "bursting" globally, is designed, this time, to undo the Rooseveltean/Social-Democratic concessions throughout the advanced capitalist core, to discredit what is left there of "national democratic institutions", and to achieve, on their second try, the global victory of 'Meta-Nazism' — to which the Meta-Nazis publicly refer by euphemisms such as "The New World Order".

Why do the 'Biggest of the Big" 'Meta-Nazi' foundations invest millions of dollars every year in the "Small is Beautiful", "anti-population", "population control", “population reduction”, and "People are Pollution" propaganda?

Were the 'Meta-Nazis' really worried about global human population growth per se, they would just institute a global "Marshall Plan" for their entire “Third World”, and accelerate the emergence of industrial capitalism, money economy, and rising living standards there; that is, accelerate the onset of the "Demographic Transition".

Instead, they have only — and at length, after the failure of their protracted resistance — allowed such industrial development to be sustained mainly in Asia — especially in China, and, to a lesser extent [owing to their greater control there], in India, and in Brazil — where their power to resist that economic development has been at least temporarily broken.

Other Asian "outbreaks" of industrialization — in Japan, in the "Asian Tigers", etc., have already been largely torpedoed and 'carpet-baggered' [bought-out by agents of the 'Meta-Nazi's for pennies on the dollar], by the Meta-Nazi's usual 'bubble-engineering', 'reverse money-laundering' techniques.

However, the proto-rival that the Meta-Nazis perceive in their present "ally of convenience" — the emerging, hybrid state-capitalist / private-capitalist ruling class of China — is already slated for destruction in the 'Meta-Nazis' upcoming sequel, '''Global Mega-Depression / World War III''':  their attempted re-play, with a vengeance, of their failed, 1930s Global Depression/global 'fascist-ization', a sequel that the Meta-Nazis have long been fabricating, and "fine-tuning", and to which they are presently adding their “finishing touches”.

The "Demographic Transition" is the massively population-growth decelerating response of human population growth rates to the emergence of a money-economy, with social-democratic, money-pension/retirement social insurance programs in place, where children cost money to raise, and no longer serve as a ready labor-force and as an "old age social security" surrogate, as they do in impoverished, rural, agricultural, "traditional" societies.

This "Demographic Transition" is, so far, the most powerful contraceptive device ever discovered by humankind!

The later stages of the contraceptive power of the "Demographic Transition" are already contributing to the "spontaneous" "achievement" of negative population growth rates in many advanced industrialized nations.

But, for the Meta-Nazis to allow industrialization-driven "Demographic Transitions" in their servant-dictators-dominated "Third World", would be to allow 'technodepreciating' competition, from the latest, most-advanced vintages of fixed capital, installed first in those "Third World" -- initially also lower-wage -- nations, to wipe-out the Meta-Nazi's power-base in the capital-value of their old, obsolete, legacy fixed capital in the "First World", either owned directly by their families, or for the purchase of which their mega-banks provided the loans, loans never-to-be repayed to them if the "First World" industries go bankrupt due to that 'technodepreciating' competition from an industrializing "Third World".

For the Meta-Nazis to allow industrialization-driven "Demographic Transitions" in their servant-dictators-dominated "Third World", would also mean the development of an educated, technically-skilled, gradually more prosperous middle/working-class there -- a class that could eventually participate effectively in overthrowing the Meta-Nazi's 'servant-dictatorships' there, and, eventually, in helping to overthrow the Meta-Nazis themselves, globally.

Moreover, it is not "concern for the biosphere" that motivates the 'Meta-Nazi's' to resist and subvert, at every turn, the economic development of their "Third World".

The Meta-Nazis don't give a hang about "the eco-system", "the environment", "the biosphere", or "the [static] balance of nature", but their propaganda uses those phrases, and feigns concern about them, because, thereby, they can dupe a lot of well-meaning middle/working-class people into working for the interests of the Meta-Nazi ruling class [ultimately, for the Meta-Nazi's interest in exterminating those middle/working-class people], and against the interests of those well-meaning dupes.

Contrary to the lies spread by the 'Meta-Nazi's' hired liars, prosperous, wealthy societies have a much greater capacity and a far better track record of repairing and avoiding ecological damage than do desperately poor societies, as Julian Simon showed [  before the 'Meta-Nazis' "disposed of" him  ].

The "Meta-Nazis' resist, subvert, and reverse the growth of the productive forces in their "Third World" because the 'Meta-Nazis' fear competitive capitalism; because they fear the rising levels of education of the producing majority that arise, as a rising "technical composition of labor" concomitant to the rising "technical composition of capital"; because they fear rising levels of economic prosperity and disposable time among the producing majority; because they fear the advancing science and technology which come with rising industrialization, prosperity, education, and disposable time for the producing majority; because they understand that Marx was right; that the development of competitive capitalism leads beyond capitalism, and leads to an end of their power to rape and pillage humanity.

The "middle class" in modern, decadent-phase capitalist society is no longer the mercantile capitalist class of end-stage feudalism, nor, in majority, the remnant, still surviving, yet-to-be-expropriated "petty bourgeoisie" of ascendant-phase capitalism.

The "middle-class" of modern, decadent-phase capitalism is the labor-time-selling/-alienating, wage-labor [and "salaried"-labor] working-class, raised, in its living standards, as in its standards of knowledge and skill, from its early ascendant-phase hyper-privation, by the self-development of human praxis itself, as the capital-relation; by the rising relative-surplus-value productivity, and technical-composition/skill-composition, of accumulating capital-value itself — within fixed capital, within constant capital as a whole, and within variable capital.

The rise, and the increasing monetary and trans-monetary 'prosperization' of this "middle class" — the very working-class-incarnation of the growth of the productive forces — is seen, by the leading faction of the decadent-phase capitalist ruling-class — which ruling class is, by all accounts, already a "class-for-itself", even though the working class is not [yet] — as a mortal threat to its continued rule, and as its greatest, mortal enemy, targeted by that ruling class for total destruction worldwide.

The core plutocracy fears “the growth of the social forces of production” [Marx], both because it threatens to ‘technodepreciate’ the vast fixed capital assets -- e.g., the global petroleum capital assets -- at the base of their power, and because it requires and develops a  more educated, technically competent producer class that can become increasingly fit to take over production, and society as a whole, from the death-grip of the decadent-phase, destructive, totalitarian, ultra-criminal, ‘‘‘eugenocidal’’’, and ‘humanocidal’ capitalist-anti-capitalist plutocracy.

Thus, these "arch capitalists" have become anti-capitalist, but in a very peculiar way!

Capitalist anti-capitalism is not the same as the potentially revolutionary and dialectical, «aufheben» anti-capitalism, or 'trans-capitalism', of the producing majority!  ...

 

Friday, February 08, 2013

Part 4 of 6: The Political-Economic "Law-of-Motion" of Modern, Capital-Centered Society



Dear Readers,

Below is part 4 of my 6-part serialization of the Equitist Advocacy group’s essay "The Political-Economic Law of Motion of Modern, Capital-Based Society -- The 'Sociotaxis' Toward [State-]Capitalist Totalitarianism as Political-Economic Attractor".

As with my previous serialization, here, of their "Malady and Remedy" manifesto, I have felt free to add to and/or to re-write portions of the text which I feel need updating, or other improvement(s).

The Equitist Advocacy group’s original essay can be accessed via the following URLs --

http://equitism.org/Equitism/Equitism-entry.htm

http://www.equitism.org/Equitism/Theory/Theory.htm

http://www.equitism.org/Equitism/Theory/PoliticalEconomicLawOfMotion/PoliticalEconomicLawOfMotion.htm



Regards,

Miguel



The Political-Economic "Law Of Motion" of Modern, Capital-based Society --

The 'Sociotaxis' Toward State-Capitalist, Humanocidal Totalitarianism as 'Political-Economic Attractor'



Part 4 of 6:  The "Lawful" Emergence of Totalitarian Rule in the Core of the "Advanced Capitalist", World-Market System

Perhaps no clearer — more prescient, more condensed — description of the political-economic self-movement, within core capitalism, toward state-capitalism, by way of "joint-stock company" capitalism, or 'corporation capitalism', has ever been written, than that which was written by Frederick Engels himself — publishing thoughts which, we conjecture, overall, he and Marx shared — in Anti-Duhring (first published in 1878), much of which still reads like passages excerpted from todays news reports!:


"It is this pressure of the productive forces, in their mighty up-growth, against their character as capital, increasingly compelling the recognition of their social character, which forces the capitalist class itself more and more to treat them as social productive forces, in so far as this is at all possible within the framework of capitalist relations.  

Both the period of industrial boom, with its unlimited credit inflation, and the crisis itself through the collapse of great capitalist establishments, urge forward towards that form of the socialization of huge masses of means of production which we find in the various kinds of joint-stock companies.  

Many of these means of production are from the outset so colossal that, like the railways, they exclude all other forms of capitalist exploitation.

At a certain stage of development even this form no longer suffices; the official representative of capitalist society, the state, is constrained to take over their management.

This necessity of conversion into state property makes itself evident first in the big institutions for communication:  the postal service, telegraphs and railways.  

If the crises revealed the incapacity of the bourgeoisie any longer to control the modern productive forces, the conversion of the great organizations for production and communication into joint-stock companies and state property shows that, for this purpose the bourgeoisie can be dispensed with.

All the social functions of the capitalists are now carried out by salaried employees.

The capitalist has no longer any social activity save the pocketing of revenues, the clipping of coupons and gambling on the Stock Exchange, where the different capitalists fleece each other of their capital.

Just as at first the capitalist mode of production displaced the workers, so now it displaces the capitalists, relegating them, just as it did the workers, to the superfluous population, even if in the first instance not to the industrial reserve army.

But neither the conversion into joint-stock companies nor into state property deprives the productive forces of their character as capital.

In the case of joint-stock companies this is obvious.

And the modern state, too, is only the organization with which bourgeois society provides itself in order to maintain the general external conditions of the capitalist mode of production against encroachments either by the workers or by individual capitalists.

The modern state, whatever its form, is an essentially capitalist machine; it is the state of the capitalists, the ideal collective body of all capitalists.

The more productive forces it takes over as its property, the more it becomes the real collective body of all the capitalists, the more citizens it exploits.

The workers remain wage-earners, proletarians.

The capitalist relationship is not abolished; it is rather pushed to an extreme.

But at this extreme it is transformed into its opposite.

State ownership of the productive forces is not the solution of the conflict, but it contains within itself the formal means, the key to the solution." [Frederick Engels, Herr Eugen Duhring's Revolution in Science, International Publishers [NY:  1966], pages 303-304, emphasis added by Anonymous].

Engels is still not fully explicit here as to the difference between the "state property" relation — 'state capital' and 'state wage labor', or wage labor hired by the state — and the subsequent "solution to the conflict", i.e., "social ownership"; 'social property' — the new property-relations, or social relations of production, of "association", or of "the associated producers" [Marx]. 


Nor does Engels seem, here, to foresee the horrific lived nightmare of police-state mass torture, mass rape, and mass-murder to which the absolute power of the monopoly-state — unchecked and unbalanced by any countervailing power — was to lead, in Stalin's Russia, in Hitler's Germany, in Mao's China, and beyond, e.g., in all of the psychopathically-vicious "Third World" police-state dictatorships imposed worldwide by the power of the core plutocracy, and also, tendentially, today, in the U.S. and U.K. core of the world-market system of capitals.

Why were these proto-state-capitalist, 'pure-bureaucratic' formations so viciously totalitarian, whereas ascendant phase core private capitalism was the champion of at least representative, political democracy and, at least ideally — although so often honored in the breach — of civil liberty? 


Because the power-to-rule, and the property, of a state-bureaucratic ruling class is totally and instantly vulnerable to purely-political assault.


A pure state-bureaucratic ruling class has only a tenuous hold on the means of production, a kind of politically-mediated, collective ownership, rather than any private or individual, e.g., legally 'familially'-inheritable ownership claim. 


If such a ruling class is deposed politically, it is deposed totally


If it loses an election — loses its hold on the state — it immediately forfeits all [collective] ownership claims, all hold on the means of production, the basis of all of its socio-political-economic power. 


Hence, such a ruling class will not tolerate — is mortally threatened by — political competition, or even by mere political dissent. 


A private capitalist ruling-class retains private ownership of the core property, the core means of social production, that found its hold upon socio-economic power, even should a hostile party accede to merely political power, e.g., through electoral victory, despite all of the incessant, enveloping ideology-inculcation by the big-capital-monopolized mass media. 


No ruling class, successful as such, for long, will consent to social conventions or institutional arrangements which put its rule, its power, in continual mortal peril.


A private capitalist ruling class can — at least during the ascendant phase of capital accumulation — afford, and even gain from, the institution of representative political democracy and civil liberty.
A pure-bureaucratic ruling class cannot.


The presently-emerging motive to totalitarianism of the core capitalist ruling plutocracy is different than were the motives to totalitarianism of the ‘proto-state-capitalist’ bureaucratic ruling classes of [pseudo-]"Communist" Russia and China.


Nevertheless, both motives come down, in the end, to the motive to maintain social-dictatorial power at any and all human costs, no matter how horrific those costs.


Backward, semi-peripheral, Stalinist, 'bourgeoisie-less' or 'pure-bureaucratic' proto-state-capitalism, conditioned by the absence of a strong private capitalist class to drive industrialization, was a 'disfigured prefigurement' of the desperate resort to the state that belongs to the lawful, ultimate destiny of advanced, core capitalism in its historical extremity.


Therefore also the manner of the overthrow of those ‘proto-state-capitalist’, totalitarian formations gives us our first, albeit also disfigured, glimpse of — and a prototype for — the potential mode of overthrow that we should expect/predict for the full-blown-totalitarian, hybrid private-/state-capitalism, that is presently emerging in the capitalist core.


The revolutionary transition into Stalinist ‘proto-state-capitalism’ was full of all of the Jacobinoid, barricaded-streets mass violence, assassination, «coup d'├ętat», civil war, and secret police reprisal and atrocity that is associated with the capitalist revolutions of the England of Cromwell and of the France of The Reign of Terror. 


That catastrophic carnage is a hallmark of those kinds of social revolutions which displace the despotic rule over, and cannibalization of, the rest of society by one privileged minority, but which replace it with the same kinds of depredations by another, new privileged minority — e.g., proto-industrialist private capitalists, or proto-state-capitalist Stalinist bureaucrats, replacing a monarchical landed aristocracy.


The overthrow of the Stalinist regime — of one of the most brutal, vicious, monstrous dictatorships in the entire history of humanity — throughout Russia and Eastern Europe, was accomplished with astonishingly little violence. 


Popular consciousness, popular will, popular intension — prepared by decades of illegal, secret, «samizdat» circulation of gradual consensus-building news and views in the context of an absolute state-monopoly upon the official means of mass communication — simply ceased to consent any longer to Stalinist rule, making this manifest in mass demonstrations so vast and so obviously majoritarian that the forces of the secret police simply did not dare to immediately intervene, out of mortal fear for their own hyper-perverted “skins”, their own, bestial, lives. 


Marxian theory, purged of Stalinoid ideology, accounts well for the social dynamics and for the social '''meta-dynamics''' of this social-revolutionary overthrow of Stalinism [Please see, for example, David Schweickart, Against Capitalism, pages 345-348]. 


The massive violence came afterward, as the 'Meta-Nazi'-orchestrated hired liars of the Rockefeller’s University of Chicago, and other "neo-liberal" operatives, imposed Weimar-like "social shock therapy" upon the Russian people, and unleashed the mafia upon civil society, to punish the Russian people for daring to choose democracy, and to "make an example of them" for all the world to see, to discourage any other oppressed societies from making any more such bids for freedom. 


The manner of overthrow of the racialist, apartheid terror-regime in South Africa — an already partially industrially-developed capitalist nation-state — may have similar lessons, we believe, for the popular but [relatively] mass-non-violent mode of overthrow of core, hybrid private-capitalist/state-capitalist totalitarianism.


Prediction:  Capitalist-style, insurrectionary means lead to capitalist ends.

 
‘Lenino-Jacobinoid’ insurrectionary/terrorist conspiracies, and general cults of "guerilla" violence, are suited only, at most, to create Stalinist, ‘proto-state-capitalist’, bourgeoisie-substitutionist, totalitarian regimes.


Those residing in the capitalist core, who wish to catalyze the genuine social revolution that leads to political-economic democracy, need to look elsewhere, to other means, and to scrutinize the «samizdat» processes which prepared the ground for majoritarian, mass-non-violent social transformation in the Stalinist, ‘proto-state-capitalist’ formations of Russia and Eastern Europe, for clues to a successful social-revolutionary praxis of their own.


The truly Marxian currents, including truly "associated producers" currents — "soviets-based", or workers'-councils-based, direct-democratic, economic-democratic currents of socialist-communist theory and praxis — were crushed, increasingly, after World War I, between the double opposition of the wealthy and murderous private capitalists and Fascist totalitarians, on the one side, and the wealthy and murderous Stalinist ‘proto-state-capitalist’ totalitarians on the other, which could not even tolerate the pseudo-opposition of ‘Trotskyoid Leninism’. 


Consequently, no large-scale 'Socialist Renaissance', no rebirth of genuine, true and liberatory Marxian theory and practice, was possible before the apparent total defeat of that theory as ideologically expropriated and misrepresented, respectively, by the core capitalist and semi-peripheral Stalinist ruling classes alike; i.e., before the collapse of the Stalinist societies in Russia and its peripheries. 


But that 'Socialist Renaissance' is still only in its barest beginnings today. 


Throughout the [pseudo-]"Soviet" period, the bulk of the "Marxian" movement had utterly discredited itself in the eyes of the working classes of the world, by prostituting itself to, advertising for, and advocating for a system of social despotism and privation — Stalinist '''national socialism''' [or '''socialism in one nation''']; a despotism even more vicious than, temporarily at least, the private capitalist despotism from which those classes already so egregiously suffered. 


This capitulation and complicity in that world-historical crime was typically signaled by statements such as the following: 


"Some open, and some covert, enemies of the U.S.S.R. claim that a new exploiting class has arisen there. They pretend to see in the officials of the Soviet system, and the variations in incomes, a new exploiting class. Yet it is admitted that this new "class" does not own the means of production, that the means of production are socialized, that no one can start a business, as in America, for instance, and hire and exploit wage workers for profit." [which means only that the Stalinist state-bureaucracy is a '''jealous god''' — jealously guarding its monopoly on capital-ownership, and on wage-worker exploitation, brooking no competition, to its role of sole national capitalist, from any other entity].


¿But could Marxian theory, noting the "uneven", 'concentric' pattern of global capitalist self-development and geographical self-deployment, have anticipated the likelihood of this disastrous detour in its destiny?

 
¿How does the emergence and historical presence of a Marxian movement as a powerful, objective force in human history change the socio-politico-economico-psychohistorical equations which embody the Marxian theory of the self-evolution-to-self-revolution, or self-ruin, of capitalist, global civilization?

 
In particular, what is implied, and what should therefore have been predicted, by Marxian theory itself, as to the reaction of the capitalist ruling class — the reaction of the dominant faction of the capitalist plutocracy — to that emergence of Marxian theory/practice as a practical world-historical force within global capitalist society:  an emergenc[e][y] for the capitalist ruling class which is also at least implicitly 'pre-dicted', or 'post-dicted', by Marxian theory itself, and what are the predicted consequences, by and for Marxian theory, and for its own practice and strategy, of that reaction?



A more fully-developed, self-reflexive Marxian theory, to be such, must be able to theorize the phenomenon of itself as a part of human history. 


It must be able to account, psychohistorically, for the irruption of Marxian theory itself in[to] world history -- for both the “where” and the “when” and the “what” of that irruption, in the boundary between the core and the periphery of the capitalist world system -- able to account, theoretically, for the timing, the geographical location, and the theoretical content of that irruption.


It must be able to account, at least ‘retrodictively’, for what will happen when Marxian theory begets a global Marxian movement that comes to the attention of the capitalist ruling class as a new, major, mortal threat to its power. 


It must and also be able to account for what will happen when Marxian theory comes to be known to, and “adopted” by, insurrectionary movements in, e.g., the still quasi-feudal semi-periphery of core capitalism, i.e., in regions which are far from being ripe for majoritarian industrial wage-working-class revolution, but which are ripe for the revolutionary overthrow of their «Ancien Regimes». 

 
The outcomes of these irruptions and interactions are now known, from the historical record.  But a more fully-developed Marxian theory must be able to pass the test of deriving them, and explaining them, scientifically, as ‘postdictions’.



We will, hereinafter, refer to the dominant faction of the capitalist plutocracy by the name 'The Meta-Nazis', because of their tendency to rule, especially in their “Third World”, via ‘servant dictators’ -- state-capitalist/military dictators, essentially ‘‘‘Nazi’’’ dictators -- who are brutal dictators to the majority of their people, but -- usually -- abjectly servile, slavishly subservient ‘‘‘servants’’’ to their masters, the core plutocracy.

Consider, for starters, that the 'Meta-Nazis' have always been able to avail themselves of the best minds that money can buy. ... 






Note [by M.D.]:   

A key feature of the “ultra-irrational” use of their ultra-concentrated, descendant-phase political-economic ‘‘‘super-power’’’, by the ruling faction of the capitalist ruling class still remains to be rationally, scientifically explained, and explained in the sense of dialectical-scientific explanation.

 
The problem to be solved is this --  


¿Why do the descendant phase rulers of the capitals-system “lawfully”, predictably apply that power to humanocide, to ‘‘‘eugenocide’’’ -- to the pursuit of catastrophic global human population reduction, under the cover of Neo-Malthusian, “[pseudo-]ecological”, “People Are Pollution” ideologies?  


The Equitist Advocacy group’s solution to this problem will be set forth in Part 5. of this serialization.  

Saturday, February 02, 2013

Part 3 of 6: The Political-Economic "Law of Motion" of Modern Society



Dear Readers,

Below is part 3 of my 6-part serialization of the Equitist Advocacy group’s essay "The Political-Economic Law of Motion of Modern, Capital-Based Society -- The 'Sociotaxis' Toward [State-]Capitalist Totalitarianism as Political-Economic Attractor".

As with my previous serialization, here, of their "Malady and Remedy" manifesto, I have felt free to add to and/or to re-write portions of the text which I felt needed updating, or other improvement(s).

The Equitist Advocacy group’s original essay can be accessed via the following URLs --

http://equitism.org/Equitism/Equitism-entry.htm

http://www.equitism.org/Equitism/Theory/Theory.htm

http://www.equitism.org/Equitism/Theory/PoliticalEconomicLawOfMotion/PoliticalEconomicLawOfMotion.htm



Regards,

Miguel


The Political-Economic "Law Of Motion" of Modern, Capital-based Society --

The 'Socio-Taxis' Toward [State-]Capitalist, Humanocidal Totalitarianism as 'Political-Economic Attractor'



Part 3 of 6:   Toward a Marxian Theory of the Totalitarianism, and of the Totalitarian Self-Degeneration and '''Political-Economic Immiseration''' of Late/"Decadent"/"Real Domination" of Capital/World-Market Society

Conjecture
These implications amount to a prediction of the phenomenon of — what has come to be called, originally by non-Marxians and, often, by anti-Marxians — totalitarianism as a theoretical category of the critique of political economy, and as a core content of the predicted political-economic "immiseration" of the lives of the majorities of the human populations of late/decadent capitalist, or global-market, society, including especially those situated within the core nations of the world-market system of capitals.


This is the context within which, in the Marxian tradition, so-called "conspiracy theories" should be judged.

Groups within human society are continually attempting "conspiracies" of all kinds — as anyone experienced in the political life, of, e.g., opposition movements, including "Marxist" organizations, corporate life, or even family life can attest. 


Perhaps, almost invariably, these "conspiracies" fail to produce the full results intended by the conspirators.

In modern, commodity/money/capital-centered society, the potential degree of success of "conspiracies" is profoundly conditioned by the class position of the "conspirators", and by the changing, developing convergence of dynamics and conditions created by the praxis of the global human species as an '''exchange-value valuing''', '''exchange-value-centered/-pre-occupied" species — dynamics and conditions which Marx summed up under the phrase "the law of value".


The core of the failure of the majority of the post-WWI "Marxist" "Left" — its advocacy of the Stalinist "Soviet" Union as an exemplar and realization of "socialism" — is also its wholesale abandonment of democracy — of the extension of democracy, beyond the representative, political-only "democracy" of ascendant-phase capital-centered society, to encompass political-economic democracy


Yet that political-economic democracy is the only way to save any semblance of even political democracy — and to save humanity itself — from the core and global, multi-genocidal degeneration immanent in decadent phase capitalist society, a degeneration into a hybrid, private/state-capitalist, totalitarian, "Hell-on-Earth" nightmare, far more horrific than even its Stalinist and Hitlerist precursors.



The "State-Capitalist" Phase of the Development of the Capital-Relation, and of Capital-Value Accumulation, and the Phenomenon of Totalitarianism

Today's remnant Stalinoid, Lenino-Stalinoid, and Lenino-Trotskyoid ‘groupustules’ [the latter, the would-be successors of the original Stalinoids, successors who would trick humanity yet a second time into fighting for their dictatorship over the proletariat; for their dictatorship over the rest of humanity; into falling for their state-bureaucratic, totalitarian, world-wide concentration camp of state-capitalisms, One Big Gulag] — indeed, all Leninoids — reject the concept of "state capitalism" out-of-hand.


Big surprise, no?


Some do so on the grounds that, without the competition of capitals to enforce, as an external compulsion upon individual capitals, the immanent capitalist "law of value", there can be no capitalism.

If the state owns all capital — if there is only one capital, if there are no longer many capitals, constraining one another to obey the "law of value", which alone defines capital as capital, and constrains it to continue to "be" capital — then there cannot be any capital at all, even if the appearance of wage-labor, with workers selling their labor-power to the state in exchange for money-wages and/or for money-salaries, persists.


They have a point, but, in this argument, they also reveal their self-vitiating self-confinement within "national socialist" horizons. 


The world of humanity does not consist of but a single nation-state. 


No single nation-state, but only the world market, is the true totality-of-reference for the system of capitals, and "Capitalist production does not exist at all without foreign commerce" [Marx, Capital, Vol. II, page 470.]. 


A "pure", idealized" model of state-capitalism would envision the ultimate completion of conglomeration, of the "mergers and acquisitions" movement, within a given nation-state, a final "buy-out" -- "hostile take-over" or not -- by the state itself, creating a "national super-corporation", managed by the state bureaucracy, on behalf of, and subordinate to, at least initially, the dominant faction of the legacy bourgeoisie of private-capitalist hyper-plutocrats. 


Each such "single capital", consolidated on a national scale, to the extent that it lacked the potential for total autarky, would still import from, and export to, the world market, competing with other national and multi-national private capitals, as well as, perhaps, with other 'nation-[al]ized' capitals, or state-capitals, other 'national super-corporations', in export markets, on the basis of the joint pursuit of capital-profitability, together with that of something we might call 'power-profitability' -- unified -- through international trade, and, alternately, through '''inter-nation-al''', '''inter-[state-]capitalist''' war.   


Rather reminiscent, is it not, of the world-system envisioned by George Orwell in his seminal, novel analysis of the totalitarian degeneration of human society, Nineteen Eighty-Four, in which the three totalitarian, ‘oligopotent’, ‘meta-national’ social formations of the permanently-militarized empires of Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia are ever at war!


Such an un-hybridized, idealized "pure type" is unlikely to emerge in actual human history. 


What did emerge, but only in two territories vast enough, in land area, in resources, and in population, to have some potential for autarky — the vast territory of Russia and the vast territory of China — was proto-state-capitalism, never developed enough, in their "Department II", consumer goods making industries, to have much in the way of competitive consumer goods exports to the world-market, throughout their entire Stalinist periods, but having sufficient autarkic potential to partially "secede", for a while, from the world market, as a geographically gargantuan "command economy", similar, in some ways, to the non-market, intercontinental command economies that prevail inside today's "multi-national"/"trans-national" private super-corporations -- formations of private, and privatized, 'Corporate Stalinism'.


Though the autarkic potential of Lenino-Stalinist Russia and of Lenino-Stalinist China shielded them, to a degree, from complete rule by the capitalist world-market’s “law of value”, the essence of the imperatives of that “law” were transmitted to those two proto-state-capitalist nation-states by the industrialized military threat, to the rule of their state-bureaucratic ruling classes, by the imperial-colonial hyper-belligerence of the nation-states of the capitalist core toward these proto-state-capitalist formations. 


Either these new state-bureaucratic, totalitarian ruling classes would mount an effective, industrialized military defense against the core capitalist ruling class industrialized military assault against them, or those new ruling classes would be militarily subjugated, overthrown, and dissolved, and their countries re-assimilated to the already-burgeoning developmentally-suppressed, industrially-suppressed “Third World” of ‘servant-dictatorships’, manufactured by and subservient to the core capitalist ruling class.


Thus, the Stalinist state-bureaucratic ruling classes, in a desperate effort to preserve their rule, and all of its “perks”, against otherwise certain invasion and overthrow by the industrialized military power of the countries of the capitalist core, in order to create the basis of an industrialized military counter-power of their own, that could deter or successfully resist industrialized military invasion by the armies of the capitalist core, plunged desperately and hyper-violently into a hyper-accelerated, massive program of “primitive accumulation” of industrial capital, via the cannibalization of the peasant and urban  working classes, to fuel a forced industrialization that effectively reproduced, in essence -- if via different motives than those that prevailed in the original, private-capitalist industrialization of the capitalist core-region -- the social and institutional features, and the social relations of production -- the capital-relation, i.e., the wage-labor-relation, the dictatorship of factory management over factory workers, the impoverishment of the working-classes -- that the “law of value” also dictated for the rest of the capitalist world market terrain. 


This Stalinist "proto-state-capitalism/autarky" hybrid thus emerged in lands situated within a "semi-periphery" of the capitalist core, peripheral societies whose home-grown, late-to-emerge private capitalist classes were stunted, crippled, and crushed, in their development, between earlier-emerged, already strong, and aggressively imperial/-colonial private capitalist classes of the capitalist core, on one flank, and the still-unconquered, crypto-feudal «Ancien Regime» of their home-terrain on the other flank. 


These private-capitalist 'dwarf-classes' were consequently too weakened to lead a classical, bourgeois revolution against their ruling absolute monarchies/landed aristocracies/war lords. 


Instead, in the social collapse aftermath of inter-capitalist war, in the case of Russia, of  World War I, a state-bureaucratic dictatorship was formed out of the victorious «coup d'├ętat» of the crypto-Jacobin, pseudo-Marxian insurrectionary party — a party which had, predictably, perverted Marxian theory into an ideology justifying the dictatorial rule of a new, would-be ruling-class. 


That is, a state-bureaucratic national dictatorship arose out of the pseudo-working-class pseudo-victory of a party of would-be/belated bourgeois social revolutionaries, stranded in a predominantly peasant society but with no effective, emergent bourgeoisie, or private-capitalist class, and with this crypto-Jacobin, pseudo-Marxian insurrectionary party forming the nucleus of the new, state-bureaucratic ruling class. 


Thus, these pseudo-Marxians prefigured the final, desperate resort to the state — to state-capitalism — still-to-come in the core regions of world capital;  in the core regions of the world-market system-of-capitals.

These crypto-Jacobin insurrectionists created proto-state-capitalism, but called it "socialism" -- “socialism in one country” -- ‘“national socialism”’


In the end, the dynamics of these statist regimes proved to exhibit nothing but a mere historical-transient, a transient trajectory in the development of the capitals-system’s world market, one that, at length, assimilates and consolidates vast portions of the former “semi-periphery” of the capitals world-system -- in this case, those of Eastern Europe, Russia, and China -- into the original core region of industrial capitalist development -- in this case, the Northern temperate zone region:  U.S./Canada/U.K./Western Europe.

   
That is, these statist regimes turned out to constitute just another, if new and novel, state-space trajectory, leading from one or another pre-capitalist state of society to the capitalist state of society.

   
They turned out to constitute just another pathway to the attractor of capitalism, a trajectory of return from quasi-autarky to the world market, one which only, initially seemed to veer away from capitalism and its world-market, but which never even got close to achieving social-evolutionary "escape-velocity" from the capital-relation-attractor.  


These statist regimes constituted, indeed, just a new form of the hyper-violent "primitive accumulation" of capital itself, accomplished, this time, not by the classical enclosure movements' collusion of landed property and incipient industrial capital, documented by Marx in Capital, Vol. I, Part VIII, but by the state-bureaucracy self-constituted as a “class-for-itself”, as ruling class, substituting for an absent/eliminated/mortally-weakened landed aristocracy and bourgeoisie.


But why does this new pathway of the “primitive accumulation” of industrial capital, as an historical-“economic process, take the political form of totalitarianism, whereas the core-region regimes of the private-capitalist ruling class, at least during the ascendant phase of the capitalist system, not only do not take the political form of totalitarianism, but even stake claims of promoting representative political democracy and liberty instead?




Note [by M.D.]:  A key feature of the “ultra-irrational” use of their ultra-concentrated, descendant phase political-economic power by the ruling faction of the capitalist ruling class still remains to be rationally, scientifically explained, in the sense of dialectical rationality.  The problem to be solved is this:  ¿Why do the descendant phase rulers of the capitals-system “lawfully”, predictably apply it to humanocide, to ‘‘‘eugenocide’’’ -- to the pursuit of catastrophic global human population reduction, under the cover of Neo-Malthusian, “[pseudo-]ecological”, “People Are Pollution” ideologies?  The Equitist Advocacy group’s solution to this problem will be set forth in Part 5. of this serialization.