[lbo-talk] Left-Forum Panel

[Carrol Cox]

As I said in my first post, the question (as I posed it) is crude; it's
probably only useful if it engenders better questions. But taking it so far
(one response from Joanna & my off-the-cuff response to that) it is
interesting the directions it points in. I would think that if "feudalism"
replaced "capitalism," Joanna's localist understanding of it would be
correct, because feudalism never was and never could have become a global
system. Hence the phrase, "feudalism at its best" would refer to some
specific location, say northern France. Or it could even be taken as
referring to Lord X's domain vs other domains. The misery of the peasants
subject to Lord Q is an isolated fact, as is the relative decency of the
peasants of Lord P. In Our Mutual Friend Dickens posits one factory at least
where (allegedly) all the workers are happy and the management are
delightful people. That would not be absurd in 12th-c England or the world
of Hesiod. (Hesiods gives us mostly "gift grabbing" lords, but nothing he
says excludes the material possibility of one or more lords being quite
benevolent. And while probably re relation 'Homer' gives between Odysseus
and the Swineherd is a shuck, it is not, _in principle_, impossible. But can
we imagine a global capitalism in which all 8 billion of us live at least as
well as the bottom third of Swedes in 1960?

ALSO. Blundering along. I think my question (even in its present
unsatisfactory form) shows the wrongness of bring morality to the judgment
of capitalism. Some form of moralism _might_ make sense in 12th-c France.
(The Scholastic concept of The Just Price made some sense when it was
raised; in the 20th-c that view is associated with Fascism in the Cantos!
And I think that was a correct perception on Pound's part: If you want a
Just Price you need a totalitarian state.

Carrol


> -----Original Message-----
> From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]
> On Behalf Of Carrol Cox
> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 7:17 PM
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Left-Forum Panel
> 
> It is not a spatial  question.  Both best and worst must be seen in terms
of
> the total world population at any given time. No Sweden (so far) without
> one-two-many Haitis.
> 
> What was the total death rate during the golden age of capitalism. Include
> all the Vietnamese who died then or later from the poisoned earth. That
was
> capitalism at its best.
> 
> Carrol
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-
> talk.org]
> > On Behalf Of JOANNA A.
> > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 7:01 PM
> > To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> > Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Left-Forum Panel
> >
> > Where would you rather live? Sweden? or Haiti?
> >
> > J
> >
> > ----------------------
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > There was an excellent panel featuring Doug, Leo Panitch, & a woman
> whose
> > name I forget. Unfortunately someone in the audience who had an
> excellent
> > question to pose wrapped it in so much long-winded argumentation that
> Jan
> > &
> > I at that point left the room. I pose the question here in a crude form,
> > hoping someone might shape it more precisely.
> >
> > Is capitalism at its best any better than capitalism at its worst?
> >
> > Carrol
> >
> >
> > ___________________________________
> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> > ___________________________________
> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> 
> 
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk