Reforms Of A Capitalism System

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

I think there is something radically different than the production site in other capitalist economies. Obviously, any process of capital accumulation adapted to a wide range of cultures and consumer habits. In this way, while on the one hand homogenizes, the other stresses differences. Thus, the production process space of a typical Mediterranean city is often driven by cultural forms, but which facilitate capital accumulation.

In general, the process of capital accumulation can take many different forms, and therefore need not be shown according to a certain pattern. The chapter appreciates the uniqueness and diversity, and can support up to a kind of monopoly. For example, the emphasis on the uniqueness of the Acropolis implies that one has to travel to Greece to see her. So everyone is trying to emphasize the uniqueness - and that involves the uniqueness of culture, which nowadays is essentially a way of commercialization areas.

However, the real tension arises when commercialized these areas end up having the same shops. When, for example, we see Benetton stores in every shopping center of each city, the antithesis of the things that is really unique in terms of cultural style, eating habits, even temporalities, rhythms, and so on, reasonably wonder: "Why I came to this city? '.

The general principle is that capital must continually invent ways of production space because it is an ever-expansive power. The perpetual repetition of the production and reproduction of the site serves just this purpose. However, how this process is implemented in each case are significantly differentiated. That's why when one is in a Chinese district will realize that all this is happening in a different way than in a Korean neighborhood or in Little Italy etc. The common element is that this process takes place in all cases: Chapter exploits diversity, insofar as it allows him to create monopolies, giving him the chance to take place during the process of expansion.

2. In your work A Short History of Neoliberalism described neoliberalism as a process of redistribution of power and wealth to benefit the elite. Did you also talk about an inverted form of Keynesianism, which the State not only idle, as the neoliberals proclaim politicians, but instead actively intervene in the economy in order to redistribute wealth in favor of the elite. Do you think that these ideas apply in the case of austerity policies currently applied in the EU or political projects like the Greek Memorandum?

The politics of austerity is based entirely on a redistributive program, which seeks primarily to resolve the difficulties in the process of capital accumulation at the expense of the most vulnerable populations. Of course, solving the problems of capital accumulation implies a degree of saving the capitalist class of the nonsense and speculative flares. It is crucial not to forget that the bankers and speculators have not been affected by this crisis, but rather, through the emphasis and insistence on ideologically directed austerity policies have failed to pass on the cost of the crisis on poorer.

3. In your book The Condition of postmodernity argue that the shift toward a capitalist economies towards strengthening the financial sector is accompanied by a cultural transformation. Given the structural changes that are capitalist economies of the current global economic crisis, what forms of cultural expression do you see emerging?

I am not convinced that we are witnessing a cultural shift. The cultural changes, described as postmodern, was largely one screen neoliberal program. In his book The Condition of postmodernity did not use the term "neoliberalism", but the term "flexible accumulation." Now, thinking back, I see that I should have used since the term "neoliberalism". Just not seeing. It's so interesting when you experience something but you can not see clearly. Only retrospectively can understand how many fields related to the policy of Thatcher, Reagan, and Pinochet them all.

So I think the postmodern shift partly parallel with the predominance of neoliberal economics. The neo-liberal economy focuses on specific aspects of the economy, which incorporates the postmodern standards emerge. For instance, accelerating implementation time consumption became more important in the course of this process. And one of the ways to perform this acceleration was to emphasize the fact of consumption, consumption of spectacle. This explains the adhesion postmodern society of the spectacle. Guy Debord had thought early on. He argued that the sight is consumed instantaneously. If the fund has produced only products that last one hundred years, we had great difficulties to maintain its marketability. Therefore some aspects of postmodernity were accelerating post-modern time and the alternation of fashions: Mermaid moves to replace one thing with another, creating goods that are long and are quickly outdated. Take for example a computer and a typewriter. What is the life span of a computer compared to the equivalent of a typewriter, which lasted twenty years and people, journalists, for example, continued to work on this year? This is unthinkable in the case of a computer. We're changing our computers every few years. Therefore, many of the aspects of postmodernity, not only have not disappeared, but have intensified. The i-Pad and i-Pod is an example of accelerating the pace of innovation. Therefore, what is happening is not a radical change, but the continuation and acceleration of processes inherent in capitalism, which developed faster especially during the decades of 1970 and 1980. Today, the acceleration is even greater.

4. You use the concept of social capital, as formulated by Pierre Bourdieu to explain how capitalism uses existing cultural differences to ensure political control but also for strengthening the process of capital accumulation. Do you think this is still a useful interpretive tool for analyzing the rise of the far right across Europe, or right-wing grassroots, like the Tea Party in the U.S.?

One of the particularly critical problems associated with capitalism is the inherent contradictions of this kind. Emphasizing the cultural specificity enhances the potential development of local fascism, and it is a major risk. At the same time, capitalism, trying to draw profits from the uniqueness, it can dehydrate so much that it is not possible now to build any kind of "monopoly", ie to make it a commodity like any other. The so-called "ntisneiopoiisi" describes exactly this process. The application of principles like "Disney" in transformants environments mocks history, makes it seem sterile. And robbing the history, everything lose interest and compromised viability. Like this arise all these contradictions. First, the excessive emphasis on homogeneity eliminates any trace of difference, but on the other over-emphasizing the specificity corresponding potential in the idea of ​​a unique relationship with the state, which may in turn be applied exclusion policies and declare that "no one else is here ". Of course, the same chapter it is difficult to devise an advertising campaign to logic "come to Hungary to see live the fascist mobilization", though by the time the chapter organizes guided tours in slums around the world, can do little much everything. In this sense, I would not be surprised if advertised special fascist mobilizations.

5. In your study of imperialism try a flashback to the respective treatments of the Marxist tradition, suggesting that war is necessary as a means of overcoming capitalist crises because of production gives impetus to industries and the use of weapons. According to this view, claim that war recreates the spatial world, creating new opportunities for capital accumulation.

Imperialism can take many forms. I'm not sure that the term imperialism is highly utilitarian longer because there are many and varied versions. For example, while there is a history of colonialism and geopolitical battles to open up new fields of capital accumulation, there are also cases where the surplus capital should be moved from one place to another. It follows, then, the question of who protects the chapter when moved to a new place and what is the new role? In this country exploits people for the benefit of another place?

Let's look at Africa and let us take the example of Zambia, a country rich in copper deposits. The two largest companies that exploit copper deposits in Zambia is one Indian and one Chinese. Whether this means that we are dealing with one Indian and one Chinese imperialism; What I can say is that there are surplus funds, which move in search of new territories and during this search they bring with them a certain political influence and some times military force. For example, the excess capital that existed in South Korea in the late 1980's, and in Taiwan about the same time, led to a massive outflow of surplus capital from these countries to Latin America and South Africa. This chapter has participated in the most horrible practices of exploitation, an interference with multinational capital. In other words, imperialism Southerners were carriers of a larger structure.

In my opinion, there is a complex structure operator that operates globally. The concept of imperialism usually implies the existence of a single imperialist center, nowadays mainly associated with the U.S. and of course with the European countries. But today we see a number of countries taking part in such a process, for example by seizing their land resources in Africa. So wake of a fierce battle with China pioneered less active in India and North America, Europe and Canada are also very active players. In this sense, much of imperialist practices nowadays do not include real wars. Undoubtedly issues include securing capital in these geographical areas. It recorded the tendency to consider the U.S. the world's policeman. The U.S., however, may not be able to sustain it for much longer this position, which largely results in the emergence of other powers aspiring to play this role.

So I think that what was bothering me more now is the geography of the whole matter. Even when I wrote the book The New Imperialism, I tried to talk about all these as overlapping spatial adjustments such as their names, exporting capital from one place and are important predators in another part - and also tried to see what happens with the flow profits from there. Finally then, I would argue that there are more fruitful theoretical treatments of imperialism to look at these issues. The exploitation of people in a geographic area by people from another still exists, but there are many different ways to do this.

6. In the recent elections in Greece, SYRIZA came close to taking power. In what direction do you think will have to move the reforms a leftist government to constitute steps towards non-capitalist alternative forms of social organization?

It is very difficult to imagine communism in one country. I think if the Left assumed the power would pursue a dynamic reform process rather than a revolutionary transformation. You could follow a program of reform, paving the way for more revolutionary movements. I think that from whatever angle you look at it, the Greek state is in need of reform.

Paradoxically, what should be done by the Left as a degree, is not to underestimate the need for a change, simply because they happen to coincide with the declaration at these rivals. We need more transparency in government and must get rid of the client state. As I read the program and SYRIZA, you must obtain finally land, and make periousiologio for all citizens. Therefore, although it sounds strange, it was a very clever maneuver to come and tell the troika, 'OK, we left we implement these reforms suggested on how to operate the Greek state. " I obviously, a reformist government that will be removed from the austerity policies and implementing a reform program, which is probably closer to Keynes than to Marx, to stabilize the situation - because I believe that one of the first things should do is get rid of the right and the fascists. And this can be done by taking as many people with you, in order to implement his reform your program, which will include, inter alia, raising the minimum wage, the pursuit of full employment, etc. I think these are to be make short term.

In a longer term, you should start thinking about how to build new economic and social relations. As to this point, I think the whole debate about the relationship between SYRIZA movements is a fundamental issue. SYRIZA has to see himself as the political wing of the social movements. Must not have any ambition to use social movements as conduits of policy. It is necessary, however, to maintain very close relationships with these movements, since there is the mount. The political leaders of SYRIZA, particularly those operating within the movements, we must pose the question: 'tell us what you want and we will try to do. " In this case we will not have to do with some reform of the Greek state, but a transformation of the substance of political parties and their modus operandi in the state apparatus.