>On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:
>
>> Other social forms are NOT "systems" as capitalism is, nor is there
>> the separation of state an "economy" that occurs under capitalism.
>
>A qualification: precapitalist modes of production were most certainly
>systems. All of the feudal land empires had vast state
>superstructures, which operated with relative autonomy from the
>productive base (peasantry). No, they weren't total systems -- they
>were poorly organized by today's standards, and were ruled ultimately
>by coercion rather than the commodity form. But they were highly
>complex systems, which anticipated many of the features of our own
>system.
This is painful to read. Carrol is gibbering, so it is best not to respond. But if you must respond, think it through.
All class systems are ruled by coercion. Economic coercion is the capitalist way and a far more efficient way it is too. But it is no less coercion merely because the threat is that you and your family will starve if you don't obey, than if the threat was that you and your family would be cleanly executed.
As to the original question, I would say that it is simply untrue that capitalism exists because you work. I should know - I've tried not working and capitalism seems to have muddled through nonetheless.
Oh well, it was worth a try. ;-)
Actually, capitalism exists because we (the subject class) obey. Like any other economic system.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas