[lbo-talk] Recent Growth & Bush's Economic Policy

[Devine, James]

I wrote:
>>... I don't see any necessary conflict between Marx and standard economics 
(supply & demand, etc.) if the insights of each are applied appropriately.
That is, I see "standard" economic analysis as working pretty well on
Marx's volume III level of abstraction, which concerns the competition of
many capitals. (That book is pretty underdeveloped and needs insight from
Keynes, etc.) That doesn't say that macro-level accumulation, profit rates,
etc. (the volume I and II levels of abstraction) should be ignored.<<

Ulhas writes:
>The conflict, I was referring to, was between the "standard" Marxist theory
of imperialism and the contemporary realities in the world economy and not the conflict,
whether real or imaginary, between Marx and "standard" supply/demand
economic analysis.<

I don't know exactly what the standard Marxist theory of imperialism is. Lenin's? Lenin himself wrote that he thought Bukharin's was better, while the latter's theory seems to describe the pre-World War I (and II) era that is long-gone.

_My_ standard Marxist theory of imperialism for the current era (and not that before WW2) involves the US as hegemon asserting itself as a embryotic world state, conquering the world. 

However, I don't think there should be one standard Marxist theory of imperialism. Instead, there should be a debate, something that has characterized the Marxist movement since the beginning. 

Ulhas had written:>>>How much does this contribute to the profitability in the US based businesses?<<<

I wrote:>> since 1997 or so, it's hurt US profitability, especially in exporting and
import-competing sectors, though things are changing.<<

Ulhas now writes:>Then why does the US capitalism allow this to happen, if it's hurting US
profitability for 6 years?<<

"US capitalism" isn't organized as a single political bloc that uses the state to control the system exactly to fit its goals. There are conflicting fractions within the capitalist class (financial vs. manfacturing, international vs. domestic, etc., etc., cross-cutting and confusing) while the anarchy of capitalist production hasn't gone away. Further, a fall in the rate of profit may be acceptable given other goals. 

Jim Devine

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 5118 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <../attachments/20031224/8e77c80e/attachment.bin>