This piece
gives a fantastic insight into the way capitalism rose and became popular
amongst the populace; it explains in a methodical manner the way the system progressed,
developed and finally became flawed.
Immanuel Wallerstein
brushes upon the point that countries have a dwindling supply of raw materials
and thus have to open up their horizons to ensure that their production mechanism
is not hampered. This is the very reason East India Company was established in 1600
to soak up resources from sub-continent and squeeze them into England which ultimately
helped them in the industrial revolution and established them as the regional
hegemons of the era. And just as the
author had stated, the large scale manufacturing created an urban proletariat that
subsequently nurtured a desire to improve their living conditions, pressing for
greater rights and disturbing the stability of the state through the formation
of trade unions and socialist parties. This meant that the Europeans had to let
go of their colonies to redistribute their surpluses to allow for a smooth
operation of the country.
As opposed
to this notion, Marxism believes that capitalism is highly flawed since it
contradicts the very principles that lay the foundations for it. Immanuel beautifully sums this in the
following words; “Short-run maximization of profit requires maximizing the
withdrawal of surpluses from immediate consumption of the majority, in the long
run the continued production of surplus requires a mass demand which can only
be created by redistributing the surplus withdrawn”.
However,
contrary to the beliefs of the author, I advocate for capitalism since it has
practically proven itself as a system that has gained popular support and
sustained the numerous challenges during its development. An example of
powerful capitalist state would be of US that has left no stone unturned to make
certain that it claims the throne of international hegemon. In a nutshell, capitalism
despite its inherent flaws is a more viable system than communism.
I do agree with you that capitilism is to some extent more viable than communism but then again don't you think movements like the Occupy Movement support Wallersteins argument that it might self destruct due to it's own inherent contradictions?
ReplyDeleteI think it is difficult to make conclusions such as the capitalist system is better than other systems because we haven't seen a true communist regime being established as yet. In Russia, it was more of Leninism or Stalinism than communism and the same applies to other countries where socialism rather than communism prevails.
ReplyDeleteI think Marxists suffer greatly from the failed communist experiments that were Leninism, Stalinism and Maoism. Frankly they were huge embarrassments for them but because they were such great failures in the name of Marxism, their reputation and credibility has suffered. I for one, would love to get a chance to meet a Marxist in person and discuss what they actually envision their ideal
ReplyDeletesocialist world to be.
Capitalism is highly resilient but its problems are compounding, now more than ever. Maybe it will adapt, change or destruct completely, but I digress because although i might have a preference (given my own socio-economic class) I don't really have the sufficient expert knowledge yet to claim or predict the future.
I was with you all the way until you made a U-turn at the end. Holding up the U.S. as an example of the successes of capitalism woefully understates why it has been successful. It has been successful because it has: 1) exploited the rest of the world; 2) Run roughshod over the environment; 3) Allowed corporations to do whatever they please; 4) manufacture a perpetually consumptive society predicated on the idea that consumption=happiness; 5) Ignored the numerous socioeconomic, cultural, and political consequences of capitalism gone wild. Capitalism is a fundamentally flawed system based on a fundamentally flawed assumption that we can perpetually growth. We can't and we won't. If nations around the world continue embracing this as the best economic model, then going forward we will be headed down the same path as Eastern Island very, very soon.
ReplyDeleteAnd Rida, go talk to Taimur Rahman. He is a card-carrying Marxist.
I'll probably end up taking a course with him at LUMS. I just find Marxism very interesting (must be the rebel in me), even though I wouldn't necessarily be it's proponent. I'm just thankful it serves as a competitor/alternative to the capitalist world view and for the chance to study it deeply.
DeleteMarxism is both a political and economic philosophy, whereas socialism is just an economic system. Socialism as an alternative to capitalism actually can work well, if implemented correctly. For example, see the Scandinavian countries.
DeleteFrankly I think that democratic socialism works best. But it has worked out well only in relatively small states. In big countries, you get problems with massive bureaucracies, which actually end up working against the goals of a socialist system.