[lbo-talk] Graber on consensus

Wojtek S wsoko52 at gmail.com
Mon Mar 4 18:13:24 PST 2013


So there was no growth between, say, ca. 2000 BC and the middle ages? They pace of growth might have accelerated with the industrial revolution, but there was certainly some growth before, even if slow. Medieval Europe certainly enjoyed material and technological advantage over the "barbarian" tribes during the Roman times.

Besides, I do not want to quibble over the issue of growth, which is pretty academic. My main point is against the left-wing millenarism that the end is near because capitalism cannot sustain itself. It has been doing all right for the past 200+ years as far as I know, and there do not seem to be any serious threats on its horizon either.

Wojtek

On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 4, 2013, at 6:16 PM, Wojtek S <wsoko52 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> As far as I know, there has been a continuous growth humanity and its
>> material possessions for the last 5 thousand or so years, so
>> capitalism, whatever that is, does not have a monopoly for growth.
>
> Most definitely not true. Growth is almost entirely a product of capitalism. Among many other sources, here's Robert Gordon:
>
> http://www.cepr.org/pubs/PolicyInsights/PolicyInsight63.pdf
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

-- Wojtek

"An anarchist is a neoliberal without money."



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list