>>> James Devine says:
Charles argues: >Finance capital is a class. Correctly said it is that the fiancial oligarchy liked the slaughter. The dictatorship of the bourgeoisie is made up of actual dictators who do like or dislike specific political occurences based on their class or material interests. So I am not sure why you are trying to make a political point as if I think an abstraction is has human characterisitcs or by "like" I mean some fancy and not a material interest. I think you know what I mean. There is no valid criticism of what I am saying based on the idea that the bourgeois ruling class is not human beings with inhuman interests.<
JD: I think it's important for the left to reconsider what they mean when they talk about "class interests." (Maybe if we think about it a bit more, we can communicate more clearly to non-leftist workers and other oppressed folks. Talking about "finance capital" liking something is alien to most people's thinking -- unless you're talking in terms of conspiracy theory.)
>>>Charles -
Well, yes when I speak to non-left workers...now wait a minute, depending on the context, I might refer to "finance capital" in speaking with non-leftist workers. When auto plants were closing galore in Detroit in the 1980's I did make some speeches to non-leftist workers. They would have had no problem with understanding the concept with a little explanation. Those at the point of production understand the viciousness of the bosses better than others in many ways.
I don't mean conspiracy. It is a system. I often try to explain that distinction to non-leftist workers too. The problem with the average worker is not that they are not willing to believe the worse about the bosses and the system. It is more that they don't feel that they can do anything about it. They are reified: take as a normal circumstance that they are powerless in their own lives.>>>
James- There's a difference between what an individual capitalist wants (which usually differ from what the other individual capitalists want) and the capitalist class interest (the shared interests of all capitalists, e.g. preservation of capitalist private property rights). There's also a difference between what a capitalist wants now (high profits) and what he or she wants over the long term (stability of profits).
>>>Charles-
I agree with you that the capitalists compete with each other. However, they close ranks vis-a-vis the working class. The whole "ballgame" is that the bourgeoisie, a tiny minority, are more class conscious, i.e. more aware of their class interests and that their individual interests depend on their class interests, than the overwhelming majority. This is the magical paradox of all ruling classes, which are all tiny minorities.
I agree there are capitalists have contradictory self-interests. The way I understand it short term bottomline dominates; but tell me more.>>>
James: I had written: >In any event, the long-term goals of finance capital do not involve mass murder. They want us all to be willing borrowers, consumers, and workers...<
Charles answers: >Well, I agree that the preferred form of government and rule of the bourgeoisie is the bourgeois democratic republic and not fascism. Just as they must have wage-labor and not slavery. And I agree that when they turn to fascism it is a sign of desparation. But there is a repeated tendency from slavery to fascism to cheat on their own preference, especially among sort of noveau riche or those ignorant of the core capitalist values. But the vulgar capitalists do hold sway at some points in history. <
James:Then we agree.
But this links up with what I said above: the vulgar-capitalist drive for profits at all cost can easily conflict with capitalist property rights and social stability. Individual greed drives such events as WW 1 and the Great Depression. Neither of those events were in the benefit of the capitalist class as a whole, either before or after the fact. Both unleashed social movements that (for a time) threatened capitalism. The Bolshevik revolution was spurred by WW 1, while the Depression encouraged a revival of the CPs (as did WW2, in W. Europe). It's hard to say that the capitalists "liked" the rise of Bolshevism or the CPs. (They did learn to live with the CPs sometimes, in Bologna, Italy, but that's a different issue.)
Charles - The contradictions of capitalism are not resolvable within capitalism. Lets see, "benefit the capitalist class as a whole". Yes, I agree that overall the outcome of WWI and surely the Great Depression were a setback for the world capitalist class as a whole. But WWI was not lauched by some non-capitalists. Capitalists made the war. It could have led to the total downfall of the capitalist system. But the capitalists rallied as a whole class and parried the Bolshevik led world working class thrust.
and Charles had said:
>I don't disagree with your outline of some of the main elements of how
things fall into open terrorist rule. But when the dust cleared, I don't
think the surviving capitalists were upset with the removal of Hitler's
main victims, especially communists , trade unionists, and millions of
Soviets people, not to mention destroy Soviet industry and "everything". <
James: Yes. But we can't assume that capitalists wanted Hitler's Holocaust ahead of time. Just because they benefited from it doesn't mean they planned it. We can't assume that all the bad things in life are the result of capitalist class interest. A lot of history happens totally as an accident, or due to the logic of events that are beyond individual or group intentions.
Charles : I don't think the bourgeoisie planned WWII down to the last detail. They had some general goals and strategies. Highest on the list was get rid of the Soviet Union. Another was curb the communists and trade unions in their own countries. Another was nurture anti-Semiticism as a scapegoating diversion from their own greed. But they didn't necessarily plan the Holocaust. On the other hand, as long as the Nazis' other goals did not conflict with the main economic interests of the capitalists, that was acceptable. The test is advance OR NOT CONFLICT with the bourgeois economic plans.
Regards,
C.B.