Grant Lee wrote:
>
> > Capital was just one
> > actor in that development, and often did not get what it wanted, as the
> > European welfare state and US New deal illustrate.
> >
> > Wojtek
>
> It can be argued, I think convincingly, that the Welfare State and the New
> Deal saved capitalism in the 1930s. Although these obviously adversely
> affected some individual capitalists and some sections of capital.
>
Personifying Capital here as wanting or not wanting something is a serious distortion. Only individual capitalists want or don't want. When we (in this post "we" = Marxists) speak of Capital we are speaking of a set of abstract relationships, not visible through a mere examination of phenomena. Wojtek is certainly correct that there was more than one actor in the drama of the 20th century -- but his examples in themselves do not establish any proposition about Capital.
And Grant's point can be expanded -- as contradictory ("dynamic") as capitalism is, _any_ action by the state (or by a given group of capitalists) will hurt some individual capitalists and some sections of capital. The world war declared by the U.S. after 9/11 is in fact both hurting and helping the same capitalist firm -- Boeing. It has increased their military sales and put a real damper on their sales of passenger craft.
Carrol
Carrol
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk