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

Yoshie Furuhashi critical.montages at gmail.com
Tue Aug 15 09:11:53 PDT 2006


On 8/14/06, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
>
> On Aug 14, 2006, at 7:22 PM, Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
>
> > Capitalism doesn't have any purpose, except M-C-M'. Its political
> > expression may be P-W-P', P being political power and W being war
> > (which is politics by other means)
>
> How does the first circuit intersect with the second?

That's an interesting question. For the time being, you might treat it like Fermat's Last Theorem: it may take 357 years before correct proof for the derivation of P-W-P' from M-C-M' gets discovered.

In the meantime, one might advance a hypothesis like this:

* M-C-M' generates a drive that is the premise of microeconomics: unlimited desire. * Unlimited desire is the dominant structure of feeling of the capitalist mode of production. * While unlimited desire drives the working class, the multinational ruling class, and the power elites of all nations, none can act on it as much as the American power elite can: the working class desire gets limited by the ruling class power to take their time; and the desires of individual members of the multinational ruling class and the power elites of all nations get limited by the American power elite who have manufactured consensus for their leadership among them. * The American power elite encounter the fewest obstacles to the exercise of their unlimited desire among all power elites, given the weakness of the American working class and the consent of the multinational ruling class and the power elites of almost all nations for their leadership.

On 8/14/06, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
>
> On Aug 14, 2006, at 7:22 PM, Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
>
> > If you poll those who own or work Wall Street, it may be possible that
> > a majority express a preference for a multilateralist, pro-European,
> > "moderate" position. But if they do, they don't appear to have
> > organized themselves into a formidable bloc to prompt the government
> > to adopt it.
>
> This depends on who you mean by Wall Street. I suspect the consensus
> on WS in the run-up to the war was, Bush probably knows what he's
> doing, so if this goes like he says, so much the better. I doubt they
> gave it much thought. As it's gone on, and badly, I'm guessing lots
> would like it to go away, but they're not sure how.

I don't think we have evidence that the WS consensus wants a swift end to the Iraq War.

In any case, as long as WS isn't sure how, as clueless as the rest of the world, what it thinks doesn't matter. -- Yoshie <http://montages.blogspot.com/> <http://mrzine.org> <http://monthlyreview.org/>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list