From: Rakesh Bhandari
> Christian wrote:
>
> > {SNIP]
> > So, after all "rescues" of one sort or another that capital has managed for
> > itself over the last 500 years, you really think the next depression will be
> > the killer? How so? Why will it be different than any of the other crashes?
>
> The rescues did not stop the return of recessions, five or seven, after
> 1970. The next crash will be different because there is less wiggle room
> for govt macroeconomic stabilisation.
So? Almost all crises have been "different." One of the internal contradictionbs of capital is its everlasting creation of differences. Claiming that there will be less wiggle room presupposes that the effects of "the crisis" are predictable, for other wise how does one know that the catastrophe will not generate its own "different" ways for the capitalist class to respond? I still like Mao's "Marxists have no crystal balls."
> > [SNIP]
> > question: Why now, as opposed to 6 months ago? Or do we just keep saying the
> > crisis is imminent until it happens?
>
> What I say is the contradictions of capital have not been overcome.
>
Of course. But how does this give us any particular political guidance? The contradictions of capital seem to be forever overcomable as long as capitalism is left to its own devices. Again, Mao, "If you don't hit it, it won't fall." Rakesh seems to want economics and crisis to perform for marxists the functions divine grace plays for Christians.
Moreover, on the whole it is more difficult to generate political opposition during times of economic hardship. Such conditions individualize workers and are a barrier to solidarity. I think our best chance for a revolutonary left is that the present boom continue until it again creates an acute crisis of rising aspirations. A bust will set us back (as was the case in the 1974-75 recession).
Carrol