>We've had endless rounds of discussion on this topic. In the
>abstract, whether there is a "tendency for the rate of profit to
>fall" or a "tendency of surplus to rise" the debate matters to
>participants because it has to do with Marx's claims about the
>trajectory of capitalist mode of development. As this dispute
>typically manifests itself here and on PEN-L it's *appears* to be an
>arcane pissing match about whether theoretical predictions have
>proven true or not, particularly as regards Leninist thought. For
>instance, Bottomore et al., write:
>
>"Leninists regard capitalism as an international and imperialist
>phenomenon. The laws of accumulation in the advanced capitalist
>countries lead to crises of overproduction of commodities and
>capital, and to a tendency for the rate of profit to fall; the search
>for profits leads to the export of capital and to a temporary
>stabilization of the capitalist world. Imperialism entails the
>division of the world between the dominant advanced industrial
>nations and the colonial societies which are forced into the world
>system, and it led to military conflict between these nations in
>world war 1. This in turn produced a destabilization of the world
>capitalist system, and created favourable conditions for revolution."
>
>Presumably, then, those who've intervened to come up with an
>alternative model have been interested in showing how Leninist
>thought went wrong--why the predictions did not come to fruition.
>Yes? No?
It's wrong in at least two major ways: empirically there's no long-term tendency of the rate of profit to fall (if there were, it'd be negative by now), and the exploitation of the so-called Third World isn't the system-saving profit gusher it's supposed to be. Cross-border investment is concentrated among richer countries and a handful of middle-income ones. There's also little intramural tension among the "imperialist" countries; for the most part, they're comfortably situated in a hierarchy with the U.S. on top (but not, as the Bush admin is showing every day, in total control).
Doug