[lbo-talk] Class Power vs. Profit Maximization (wasTacticaldifferences at the top)

Marvin Gandall marvgandall at videotron.ca
Mon Aug 14 14:59:40 PDT 2006


Yoshie wrote:.


> IMHO, Wall Street -- whether you mean the stock market in general or
> investment bankers, hedge funds, mutual funds, pension funds, and
> other fund managers, etc. in particular -- neither agitates for nor
> agitates against any war.
============================================== I'm not aware of any unified voice through which the corporate sector actively and publicly "agitates" for or against wars, although there are many channels through which it more discretely communicates its views on these and all major issues to the political leadership in Washington. My impression, though, is that Wall Street's position on the war, broadly speaking, has been closer to that of the multilateralist, pro-European, northeastern, "moderate" wing of the Republican party associated with the Bush the Elder (and the Democrats) than to the socially conservative, militaristic, sunbelt Republican wing associated with Bush the Younger.

In any case, this is tangential to the discussion we were having. I expressed what I think is a pretty commonplace view on the left that the purpose of US foreign policy is to secure resources and open markets for US corporations. This was in response to your question about what its interests were. For some reason, you didn't like my answer. You seem to see in it a vulgar reductionism, ie. US foreign policy decisions are predicated on the expected "rate of return" to US corporations, when I haven't said anything like that.

Your own answer seems to be that there is no design to US foreign policy; that it's architects just want to project power for power's sake - or, at best, to nebulously "hold on to class power", without defining the purpose to which that class power is being put. "What they really enjoy and want to hold onto is class power, even if more of class power leads to lower rates of return than less of it", you wrote earlier.

It's still unclear to me from your comments whether we have any substantive disagreement on US foreign policy objectives or you'e just coming at it in a different way.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list