Jim Choate <ravage@einstein.ssz.com> writes:

On 21 Sep 2000, Craig Brozefsky wrote:

...

Considering the current situation, and the contant referrals to it as Capitalism, I wonder how useful this definition really is.

Who refers to capitalism as socialism? If they equate these two polar concepts then this indicates the speaker doesn't have a clue.

Well, petro attempted to define socialism as: "Socialism *always* means that the same people in a society who control the use of force also have control over the economic structure." My comment was directed at the ambiguity of this definition. For most of human history, those who controlled the use of force had control over the economic structure. The control was excercised thru various social institutions ranging from direct theft, to fuedal landholdings, to centralized beurocracies, to corporations and nation-states. Today our economic structure is dominated by corporation, global capital, and the fading nation-state. These same institutions which structure our economy also control the use of force, and/or are dependent upon it. The notion of private property is maintained under threat of force. Nation states enforce, or don't enforce, capital controls, trade regulations, and the various other economic policies which shape our economic structure with the threat of force as well. People call this Capitalism. It would seem that the current situation fits petro's definition of Socialism. So, as I said before, petro's definition doesn't seem very useful since it fails to distinguish two different types of political-economic arrangements. But perhaps petro was just advancing that as a cocktail-party quip, and not as a useful definition of socialism. That's ok. I also don't think capitalism and socialism are polar opposites, but perhaps that's for another discussion. Ideologically they are set up as polar opposites, but structurally they are not. In fact any feasible socialism will incorporate many of the features we associate with capitalism including competition, markets, distributed decision-making, and globalized production. Just as any existing capitalism today contains elements of socialism. This is not too imply the two are interchangeable. -- Craig Brozefsky <craig@red-bean.com> it's alright 'cos the historical pattern has shown / how the economical cycle tends to revolve / in a round of decades three stages stand out in a loop / a slump and war then peel back to square one and back for more -- Stereolab "Ping Pong"