Loading...
Welcome to Anarcho-Punk.net community ! Please register or login to participate in the forums.   Ⓐ//Ⓔ

Is the US a capitalist system?

Discussion in 'General political debates' started by bgrass, May 18, 2010.

  1. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    quite too simple:
    which class was always the cannon fodder for fascist movements?
    which class suffers from late-capitalisms centralisation of capital, or as you stated it:
    which class was breeding adolf h. and the majority of his clones, benito muzzolini and his mozzarellas or franco and his half-and-half tortillas made from the falange and royalists?
    Does fascism has strong anti-capitalist tendencies here and there - if necessary?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

    What happens in the u.s. and elsewhere in the western capitalist world is called late capitalism, according to marx-brother karl a stage in the development of capitalism, because according to Marx, capital has the tendency for concentration and centralization the hands of richest capitalists:
    "It is concentration of capitals already formed, destruction of their individual independence, expropriation of capitalist by capitalist, transformation of many small into few large capitals ... Capital grows in one place to a huge mass in a single hand, because it has in another place been lost by many ... The battle of competition is fought by cheapening of commodities. The cheapness of commodities demands, caeteris paribus, on the productiveness of labour, and this again on the scale of production. Therefore, the larger capitals beat the smaller. It will further be remembered that, with the development of the capitalist mode of production, there is an increase in the minimum amount of individual capital necessary to carry on a business under its normal conditions. The smaller capitals, therefore, crowd into spheres of production which Modern Industry has only sporadically or incompletely got hold of. Here competition rages ... It always ends in the ruin of many small capitalists, whose capitals partly pass into the hands of their conquerors, partly vanish." (from "capital"[/quote]
    In other words: capitalism is eating itself, starting with the weakest competitor - the middle class.

    Wars typically causes the diversion, destruction and creation of capital assets as capital assets are both destroyed or consumed and diverted to types of production needed to fight the war. Many assets are wasted and in some few cases created specifically to fight a war. War driven demands may be a powerful stimulus for the accumulation of capital and production capability in limited areas and market expansion outside the immediate theatre of war. I think the u.s. is a perfect example, developing the worlds largest MIC in the early 40's to support the anti-fascist allies of WWII and gaining immense profits from doing so - and they never stopped or reduced the part of this war-industry.
    Ex-WWII general Eisenhower warned the us-public of the influence the weapons-industry already had gained on the politics of the nation when he left the presidency of the u.s. 1961 - guess he knew what he was talking about.
    So the us-military industrial complex isn't really necessarily a step towards fascism, it's just a special aspect of capitalism and it's ability to adapt to political settings or changes at the very basics of the economy, scarcity of resources as an important example:
    The u.s. military doesn't fights for political, racist or other ideological reasons in the near and far east - it fights just and only for the control of the last oil-reserves important to the us-capitalism and it's beneficiaries.

    Fascism has not only a more or less prominent anti-capitalist tendency, turning the capitalist economy into state capitalism, exercising control over private property and opposing any idea of "free" economics" - it has another bad habit too:
    To destabilize and destroy itself via it's aggressive expansionist imperialism - again it's germoney and italy for examples.
    Some theories claim that capitalism is using fascism as a tool to prevent socialist or communist liberation, but after the job is done, the bloodhound will always be kicked back in line before growing too strong and becoming a threat to it's own masters.
     
  2. Sarmaister

    Sarmaister Member Forum Member


    11

    0

    0

    Aug 8, 2011
     
    yes , i do tend to simplify things xD
    to answer your question : Hitler was backed by the rich and the nobility and upper class industrialists , mussolini was just a cunt , but he was supported by the nationalists and imperialists. fascism as a historical fact was born out of extreme nationalism , eugenics , and realy regressive ideas of the late 19th century .

    all fascism tramples the working class coz they need obedient workers , not organized unions or worse , political working class revolutionary force.

    fascism as a political fact is born out of the very process you speak of , accumulation of capital giving private persons too much power to spend in a lifetime . and over lobbys and other methods of influencing the political aparatus , the do indeed have a strong grip over the military - the armaments production was mentioned coz the US does have a vast weapons industry (well not vast enough to beat the allmighty KIM)


    my point being that fascism is the last step in the "evolution" of capitalism
     
  3. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    What I meant was:
    Hitler came from a middle class background, his ideals up to his antisemitism/racism were purely middleclass pipe dreams, all about a future paradise in the east, with healthy and goodlooking aryans dancing in pre-industrial blessedness... or as you said:
    Brooded out of the bourgeois liberal movement in the mid 19th century - the german "vor-märz" for example which was leading directly to the union of all small german states led by prussia - 1871 "the 2. reich":
    emperor wilhelms holy german nation which started the first world war to get the poor empire some colonies to leech...
    Eugenics too were one of the favoured ideas of the middle class/bourgeois, simply used to deal with the mass misery of the uprooted proletarians living under more than unhealthy conditions - let's breed some strong workforce by rooting out the weak, let's call it humanism...

    The weak spot of the proletarians was always their lack of education and their vulnerability to "easy" solutions like nationalism ect., so the germans workers and unemployed became the mass basis for the nazis, the italians for the fascists - both movements were supported by the upper class capitalists but both were using democratic elections to take over the state - so the führer and the duce were elected to lead the people into ruin.
    The germun sa and the ss, the italian fascist thug squads too, were working class mass organisations, used to destroy any opposition on the streets - the police or even the military couldn't have accomplished this repression better - class war at it's worst:
    Using the lower class to fight it's own liberation.
    but it tramples the capitalists too if necessary for the final stage: state capitalism - maybe thats part of the attractivity fascism has for the mislead and brainwashed workers, doing the dirty job for a small gang of "saviours of the people and the nation" preaching to free the workers from capitalist exploitation and democratic repression.
    (what the allmighty KIM? - and btw according to georges orwells idea of the "endless war" capitalism don't needs to win as long as the cash registers are ringing and the fatherland including the sources of raw materials are safe and under control - see Irak and Afghanistan...)
    But in history most fascist leaders were members of the middle classes, some even had a working class background - and with it's very own weird mix of anti-capitalistic insight and right-wing-madness (like nationalism ect.) I think it's a separate/unique polit-economical system.
    Fascism is in fact competeting with capitalism, replacing the leeching upper class with the leeching state and it's representatives coming from the middle class and even realising egalitarian ideals - by degrading each and everyone of the "choosen" people/ the master rats to mere slaves/cannon fodder of the state.
     
  4. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    203

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    Please don't use sexist or homophobic words on this forum, you might want to take a minute to read the "Who Are We?" text and think about whether or not this is something you can agree to.
     
  5. nike

    nike Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    439

    0

    6

    Jun 19, 2011
     
    I think the cold war starting in the aftermaths of the second world war played a role or two too, the armament race between n.a.t.o and warsaw pact and the rising communist china kept everyone more than busy and the seperated societies under constant tension and anxiety. the u.s. interventions in korea and vietnam/thailand/kambodscha/laos for examples were much too expensive to allow kennedy's and johnson's "big society" to be developped, some people claim by intent of the ruling classes:
    guess you thought of that one:
    and you'll never can come up against the allmighty KIM SHATTUCK... :D
     
  6. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    umm, but the capitalists are the ruling class...

    socialism is pretty clearly not the control of the state by the working class neither... (like history stylez)

    to say one class is this/that/the other is problematic as fuck, but fascism can often be seen as the bourgeois forfeiting its own governance (Liberal-'democratic' capitalism) to ensure its own (class) continuation (despite this contradiction) when faced with the risk of losing it. Spain and Italy being cases in point, analogously, look at Marx's The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon.

    If we talk about what is in our, lower class/es', interests, lets start talking about our own negation, our interests are inherently the destruction of social classes; fuck socialism (its a transitional demand anywayz, albeit one that obliterates our chances of achieving the ends)
     
  7. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    I didn't dare to use the "The Eighteenth Brumaire..." as an example because of ol'karls problematic depiction of the lumpenz as an easy tool for hire to support a despots rise, but besides that, the analogy to fascist movements is indeed remarkable.
    And I guess there're enough bad examples of socialist "transitional stages" between east-berlin and bejing/Pjöngjang... and I don't want to march in goose step to military music :ecouteurs:
     
  8. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    i meant only insofar as the bourgeoisie is concerned.
     
  9. nike

    nike Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    439

    0

    6

    Jun 19, 2011
     
    may i ask whats wrong with goose step and military music - i mean beside it's being bad taste, odd looking, even unhealthy maybe, but reactionary for sure?
    [​IMG]
    and east-berlin/pjönjang isn't what it used to be tawarishch commissar, okay, maybe the improvement wasn't that significant :ecouteurs:
    [​IMG]
    and it's sexist too!
     
  10. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    Nike Mikhailowna, I said:
    Three shifts with the literacy campaign and another three with da spellin' beez!
    The sexy way to move:
    [​IMG]
     
Loading...