Capitalism's rate of decay ( Communication)

[Brad Mayer]

A concept of Late Feudalism might be of some assistance here.  But first:
"Lateness" arrives at the point where the scale and scope of capitalist 
development generated social and political crises, in the course of the 
'normal' processes of the business cycle, which threatened the existence of 
capital.  IOW, the point at which the real supersession of capital became 
an actual possibility. WWI was that point.  Keynes and the RR was its sign.

In the 19th century, capital could survive unrestrained boom/bust.  After 
WWI, no longer.  It began to envision its own death, and still does 
(perhaps unconsciously now, repressed).

This process is described in "Empire", BTW - it's one of the better 
features of the book.  It is variously described there as the "real 
subsumption of labor to capital", the "hybridization of the functions of 
state", the withering away of civil society "as adequate point of mediation 
between capital and sovereignty" (p.328), etc.  I'd basically describe it 
as the process of dissolution "into one another" of the social relations, 
including relations of state, specific to capitalism.   You know the quote:
"This is the abolition of the capitalist mode of production within the 
capitalist mode of production itself, and hence a self-abolishing 
contradiction, which presents itself _prima facie_ as a mere point of 
transition to a new form of production."  The rest, no 'mere question' at 
all, as it's turned out, is a matter of how quickly we can shove it past 
the 'point of transition'. (quoted on pg. 325)

It's not to be confused with economic decline, of course.  As Lenin 
off-handedly put it towards the end of "Imperialism" (to paraphrase 
slightly), "Capitalism grows more that ever".     Which brings us to the 
matter of W. Europe of the 16th & 17th centuries, a time of great economic 
growth, where no skepticism would be seen as warranted before the 
description of this period as "Late Feudalism".  Why should it be any 
different for our own time when faced with similar, analogous evidence today?

-Brad Mayer
At 01:15 PM 8/14/01 -0400, you wrote:
>Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 12:55:23 -0400
>From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com>
>Subject: Re: Capitalism's rate of decay ( Communication)
>
>Charles Brown wrote:
>
> >Are you saying "lets hurry up and end capitalism"  ? Or that because
> >it hasn't had  an accelerated rate of decay, it will never end ?
>
>I'm all for ending capitalism. It's not likely to end itself.
>
>Doug