The tawdry morals of capitalism
Twenty years ago, the
representatives of capitalism celebrated the collapse of Stalinism. And
the major powers imposed their economic and military dominance across
the globe, increasing the exploitation and suffering of billions of
people. Today, they want to make the working class and poor pay for the
deep economic crisis they have created. PETER TAAFFE explains how this
has exposed the bankruptcy of the capitalist system, not only
economically but also ideologically and morally.
THE ‘MINI-ICE AGE’ which
gripped Europe in the early part of 2010 parallels the current frozen
character of world capitalism as a system. However, while the weather
will improve, there are no sunny economic uplands beckoning for
capitalism. Indeed, in sharp contrast to the mood exuded in the 1990s
and the noughties (the past decade) by the representatives of
capitalism, particularly the soothsayers, there is profound questioning,
growing uncertainty and even deep pessimism about the future prospects
for their system. Some, lamenting their previous financial
‘irresponsibility’, suggest that the noughties should be called the ‘oughties’:
‘Christ, we oughta have seen this coming’.
This merely underlines the
fact that even the most intelligent capitalist representatives are
incapable of foreseeing the future because their system is unplanned and
determined by the blind play of the market. They lament the consequences
of this, wring their hands, fail to find a rational explanation and seek
solace in a ‘higher being’. Before and after Christmas, bankers and city
sharks, it seems, packed out the pews of churches such as St Paul’s
cathedral in London in a demonstration of repentance. However, while
seeking salvation in a god, they still worship mammon, as the continued,
unprecedented stuffing of massive bonuses into their back pockets
indicates. Lloyd Blankfein, chairman of Goldman Sachs, "feared for its
Wall Street aggression", feels compelled to describe himself as "doing
God’s work"!
All of this suggests that, in
the wake of the most devastating economic crisis for almost 80 years,
the cohesion – the ideological underpinning and moral cement used by the
capitalists to justify their system – is falling apart. It appears that
the working-class victims of the Morgan Stanleys, whose lives have been
shattered by the ‘inexplicable’ forces of capitalism, have also been
filling out churches. They will not find salvation – of the ‘earthly’
kind, at least – in this quarter. But even this denotes the search for
solace, refuge for a "soul in a soulless world", as Karl Marx explained.
Its roots, however, lie in the desperate straits of many workers and the
subterranean mass discontent which will break to the surface in the next
period. Without the underpinning provided for capitalism by its
superstructure – the state, but also the ideological justification
provided by its army of professors, academics and political
representatives – this system would not last for a month, particularly
in this massively-changed economic situation.
Despite the huge growth of
income disparity during the boom, the justification for capitalism was
that it was a system that provided the "greatest good for the greatest
number" (the utilitarians). More prosaically, the now discredited former
chairman of the US Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan, expressed the view
that capitalism was the best system for "producing and delivering goods
and services". A never-ending and growing stream of goods to the
majority of the peoples of the planet would furnish a ‘golden stairway’
to greater and greater wealth and happiness. No more! The huge army of
unemployed, alongside the growing numbers of the poor, falsifies in
practice the expectations of these ‘prophets’.
In Britain, recent figures
have shown that in the last five years – under Tony Blair and Gordon
Brown – there has been a significant overall drop in the standard of
living compared to the previous decade. Britain is now either behind or
barely on a par – depending on which economist’s estimate you accept –
with Italy in capitalism’s economic league.
The worst possible system
FACED WITH THE ineluctable
facts indicating that capitalism is in a blind alley, the system’s
theoreticians have fallen back on the threadbare arguments of an earlier
British Tory prime minister, Winston Churchill. He argued that
"capitalism is the worst possible system apart from all the others". In
a similar period to this, the 1930s, this argument cut no ice as the
advantages of the planned economy of Russia – despite the bureaucratic
gangsterism of Stalinism – represented a progressive contrast to
beleaguered capitalism. The one-party totalitarian regime associated
with Stalinism was used even then, however, to blight the consciousness
of the mass of the working class by picturing this as ‘socialism’.
This also had some traction
during the economic fireworks of 1950-73, and even during the boom of
the 1990s. This was reinforced by the collapse of the Stalinist regimes
of Eastern Europe and Russia, and the revelations of the monstrosities
of Stalinism in its wake. But to associate Stalinism with the genuine
and liberating democratic ideas of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky and
Luxemburg is like associating all Christians with the crimes of the
Inquisition or Islam with the reactionary methods of right-wing
political Islam and the abominations of Osama bin Laden and al-Qa’ida.
Nevertheless, despite the
horrors that came with the return to brutal capitalism in the former
Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, the populations of these countries were
reconciled to their largely miserable lot on the basis of the
perspective of ‘blooming landscapes’ once capitalism had been firmly
established. That happy scenario never materialised. On the contrary,
for Russia at least, it meant a massive collapse in the productive
forces, worse than what we are witnessing today. As those promises turn
to ashes, the masses of these countries are reflecting bitterly on the
results of this capitalist ‘experiment’. Latvia, for instance, has the
highest unemployment rate in Europe. Workers commented to a Financial
Times reporter: "It’s just like 20 years ago, except now we are pushed
around by the European Union rather than Russia. We’re still slaves,
just with different masters".
For the US, which remains the
dominant economic force on the planet with a 22% share of global income,
the economic problems are mounting and seem to be intractable. This is
reflected in the devastating epidemic of joblessness that has swept
across America in the past 24 months. In January 2008, unemployment
stood at 4.9% of the workforce but has now risen to 10%, significantly
worse even than Britain’s 7.9%, or Germany’s 7.5%, while the EU’s as a
whole has risen to 10% (that is just the official rate). Japan’s is
‘only’ 5.2%. Yet Barak Obama predicted that his massive $787 billion
stimulus package would prevent a fall in employment with unemployment
topping out at 8%.
The fate of Obama and
particularly the Democrats in this year’s mid-term congressional
elections hinges, in the main, on the economic fortunes of the country.
A Gallup poll for USA Today found that 55% of Americans disapprove of
Obama’s handling of the jobs crisis – an equal figure of disapproval for
his handling of Afghanistan. Little wonder when even the British press
like the Guardian shows a full-colour picture of a tent city in
Sacramento "filled with unemployed people who have lost their homes
after failing to meet mortgage repayments". In this photograph is summed
up the shattering of another firm prop of capitalism, personified by
Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan: the so-called ‘property-owning
democracy’.
The collapse of Britain’s
housing market by 13% so far, with further falls to come – despite the
optimism of the so-called ‘property experts’ – means that owning your
own home is completely out of the reach of huge sections of the new
generation in particular. In 1997, 42% of under-30s owned properties
with a mortgage, compared with around 30% who rented privately. By 2008,
these proportions had switched to less than 30% and nearly 50%
respectively. According to the Observer: "Very soon, more than half of
all twentysomethings will rent with no realistic prospect of buying.
Scarcely noticed by policy makers, a structural change in the housing
market also signals a cultural shift in the nation. Owner-occupiers see
a house as a repository of wealth, an investment vehicle and a source of
retirement income. Renters don’t". In England there are currently 1.8
million families on the waiting list for social housing but
council-house building is at an all-time low.
European default
IN EUROPE, A number of
countries, such as Ireland and the Baltic states, including Lithuania –
an economic basket case with a 15% drop in gross domestic product (GDP)
last year – have already been plunged into a ‘depression’. As in the
1930s, the defaulting of countries looms, as the experience of Iceland
shows. Moreover, the decision of the Icelandic people – upheld by
Iceland’s president – to refuse the repayment terms imposed by the
British government indicates ferocious resistance to the masses paying
for the capitalists’ economic crimes. They face paying up to 50% of
their GDP!
Icelanders, formerly one of
the most ‘prosperous’ peoples of the world, have taken to the road that
the masses of the colonial world have travelled before, when they
demanded ‘no payment of the imperialist foreign debt’. Imagine then the
reaction that is coming in Greece to the cuts that the Greek
capitalists, in consonance with the global capitalist institutions, such
as the International Monetary Fund and eurozone authorities, will seek
to impose with the compliance of Papandreou’s PASOK government.
A period of unparalleled
social tension beckons with all the careful ‘plans of mice and men’,
such as the eurozone, coming apart. The eurozone faces big centrifugal
forces rather than the centripetal process of integration of the
previous period. Europe’s underlying economic situation is even worse,
in a sense, than in the US. The eurozone economy is almost as big as
that of the US and three times bigger than those of Japan and China.
But, while the US economy declined from peak to trough by 3.8% between
2008 and 2009, the eurozone dropped by 5.1%.
‘Normally’ – that is, before
the creation of the eurozone – the most economically affected countries,
such as Greece, Spain, Italy and Portugal, would have seen their
currencies devalued sharply against the stronger currencies, such as the
old German deutschmark. But in the iron corset of a common currency, the
devaluation route is not open to them. Therefore, ‘internal devaluation’
– slashing the living standards of the working class by holding down
wages and cutting public expenditure – is the only road on a capitalist
basis. But the masses will not roll over and tamely accept this.
Therefore, an explosive social situation could result in some or all of
these countries either leaving or being ejected from the eurozone
itself.
Chinamerican tension
NOR WILL WHAT the historian
Niall Ferguson calls ‘Chinamerica’ offer a long-term solution for
capitalism. The economic alliance between China and the US denoted by
this phrase did help to sustain world capitalism through the 1990s and
the noughties through an investment boom in China matched by a massive
consumer market in the US for the goods produced in China and elsewhere.
But this came at the expense of a great piling-up of surplus dollars in
China’s reserves and a process of massive de-industrialisation in the
US, which went together with its yawning and growing trade deficit. The
collapse of the dollar, partly contrived by the US economic authorities,
has cheapened US exports but also acted to devalue Chinese reserves.
Seeking to mollify the fears of the Chinese, in a recent visit to
Beijing, Timothy Geithner, US Treasury secretary, tried to reassure an
audience of students and economists that the Chinese dollar reserves
were "in safe hands", in the guarantees of the US administration that
they would not be devalued. This was met with open derision.
This points up the increased
tension between China and the US which extends beyond economic rivalry
to a conflict of a geo-political character. Obama’s visit to China last
year was, in effect, the visit of a debtor to his banker. It also
indicates that the Pacific and Asia is much more important now to US
imperialism than the Atlantic and the ‘old continent’ of Europe. But
Asia is also a theatre where the long-established might of US
imperialism is being challenged by the ‘new kid on the block’ in the
form of the Chinese regime. The growth of China’s military power –
particularly its navy in the last period – is connected to its
spectacular economic growth and its attempt to establish a dominant
influence in Asia. The GDP of China has increased tenfold in the space
of 26 years, according to Ferguson. It took Britain 70 years in the 19th
century to experience a similar economic rise. At the beginning of the
noughties, the US economy was eight times larger than China’s. Now it is
four times the size. There are predictions that it will overtake America
as early as 2027 – in under two decades.
But this prognosis ignores
the massive imbalances in China’s growth and, in particular, the mass
discontent brewing just below the surface, which the Beijing regime
cannot hold in check indefinitely. At the same time, in the capitalist
sector of the economy, a bubble is under way. The assembly of the
massive industrial machine and the seemingly endless production of goods
will come up against the limitations of world capitalism, both now and
in the future. The US economy can no longer act as the ‘market of last
resort’ for China and the rest of the world. A switch towards the
markets of Europe, Japan or the neo-colonial world is very problematical
given the depression of ‘demand’. The measures to restrict wages and
hold down living standards undertaken by the capitalists have reinforced
this.
Moreover, this crisis has
demonstrated the classical features of capitalism in crisis: of a glut,
particularly in manufacturing, in which China specialises, of course. It
is not only China but also Germany, the economic powerhouse of Europe,
which will come up against the limits of the market in the next period.
In Britain, too, even a huge 30% devaluation of the pound cannot be
fully taken advantage of by British capitalism because of the eating
away of its manufacturing base and the stalled world economy.
A premature sigh of relief
CAPITALIST ECONOMISTS – at
least the more sober of their breed – do not believe their own
propaganda that there is evidence of ‘green shoots’ offering a lifeline.
The productive forces are hemmed in by the limits of private ownership,
on the one side, and the nation state, on the other. They are weighed
down with the lead boots of debt and the consequences of past
‘excesses’. All the prognostications for the future of capitalist
globalisation have been falsified. A kind of creeping protectionism is
under way, although the ruling classes of the world have avoided falling
into the trap of repeating the massive trade war which compounded their
problems in the 1930s’ depression.
Unless the working class
takes power, Lenin and Trotsky pointed out, capitalism will always find
a way out of its impasse, and will be able to re-establish an unstable
equilibrium. But such is the scale of this crisis that, if the mass of
the working class and the poor of the world had a real rallying point of
mass parties, even of the limited kind which existed prior to the
collapse of Stalinism, an entirely different social and political
situation would confront us today.
To say that the bourgeois are
breathing a sigh of relief at the absence of such forces is a colossal
understatement. As the new year opened, the Financial Times pointed to
the coincidence last year of "the largest ever rescue of capitalist
markets on the anniversary of the free marketers’ first election victory
in the west (Margaret Thatcher in 1979) and the demise of the socialist
economic models in the east (a decade later)". It even admitted that
this was a "welcome comeuppance for a crazy experiment in market
fundamentalism, marking a long overdue return of the state to the
government of social and economic affairs". But, jeeringly, it concluded
that this was "matched by the failure of those who claim to have
alternatives to capitalism. Where is the European left? the Financial
Times asked a year ago – and the answer remains that the left is missing
in action in what should have been its finest hour". We have explained
the causes of this contradiction many times. The collapse of Stalinism
led to an orgy of capitalist triumphalism which completely disorientated
the tops of the labour movement who fell into the bosom of capitalism
and abandoned any idea of the socialist project or even class struggle
itself.
But this organ of finance
capitalism is celebrating too early. The leaders or, to be more exact,
ex-leaders of the workers’ parties and organisations – including a big
layer of the trade union leadership – have been missing in action it is
true. But this is not true of the working class who have borne, and will
continue to bear, all the indignities and cost of this crisis on their
backs. They are yearning for an alternative. Moreover, as the organs of
big business themselves record, there is not just discontent but a
growing hatred of the rich, of the ‘banksters’, which is burgeoning into
a pronounced anti-capitalist mood.
This could be harnessed in
Britain if a new left workers’ party was created – something the
Socialist Party is energetically working towards with others – as has
been the case in other European countries: for example, Die Linke in
Germany, Syriza in Greece, etc. These formations are limited, partly
reflecting the undeveloped consciousness of the masses, as well as the
deficiencies of their leaderships. Also, these parties have not yet
worked out a clear analysis of the present capitalist crisis or a
fighting programme which allows them to intervene, not just on a
propaganda level but in active assistance to the working class in
struggle. But they are not the last word in the kind of workers’
organisations and parties which are required for the coming battles.
Even with their inadequacies, however, they provide a broader forum with
the potential to develop in a mass way, for discussion, debate and
action amongst more workers and activists.
The colossal pro-capitalist
barrage in terms of the consciousness of broad layers of the population,
particularly the working class, represented a turning back of the wheel
of history. It was not an outright military dictatorship, a physical
counter-revolution against the rights and conditions of the working
class, which has fulfilled such a role historically. The advanced
elements were not physically annihilated, as happened under Pinochet’s
military dictatorship in Chile or the Argentinian junta.
But the desertion of the
leadership of the workers’ organisations to the capitalists, combined
with the economic upswing of capitalism in the 1990s and noughties, did
act to discourage and wear out a previously politically advanced layer
who were crucial in the battles of the working class in the pervious
period. Only the small forces of Marxism, together with an important
layer of advanced militants in the trade unions, maintained the banner
of the class struggle and socialism. But that is changing, and will
change even more rapidly in the next period. This is not wishful
thinking but is determined by the intractable character of this crisis
economically and its social and political repercussions.
The growth puzzle
EVEN THE ECONOMIC
witchdoctors of capitalism puzzle over where growth will come from. Not
one serious bourgeois commentator expects economic fireworks. Some, like
Will Hutton, an avowed Keynesian, point to the "spectacular growth" in
the stock exchange. Along with Adair Turner – now dubbed ‘Red Adair’ for
describing some financial business as "socially useless" – Hutton
clutches at straws in a desperate attempt to find some light in
capitalism’s bleak economic winter. Yes, there will be some growth. The
economic cycle of capitalism accurately analysed by Marx – and only by
him – means that crises, after destroying value, create the conditions
for creating new fields of investment with a higher rate of profit and,
therefore, a growth phase once more. But so debt-soaked is capitalism –
individuals, families, companies and, above all now, governments – that
any growth will be niggardly.
The growth experienced in the
last quarter of 2009 and probably in the first quarter of 2010, even for
the laggard British economy, is largely accounted for by the rebuilding
of stocks – the ‘cash for clunkers’ schemes, for example – and, in the
case of Britain, an increase in spending in shops over Christmas because
of the looming lifting of reductions in VAT, which New Labour introduced
in 2008. A ‘spectacular’ increase in the stock exchange and shares is
largely accounted for by governmental stimulus packages, which have gone
into the pockets of the bosses. This has not been invested. In fact,
investment in industry in Britain has gone back. Even state investment
will be cut as New Labour admitted in its pre-budget report. It has been
siphoned into speculation in the so-called ‘carry trade’ – speculation
in high-interest currencies using capital borrowed in low-interest
countries. This is creating the basis for a new collapse this year and,
possibly, a double dip in the economy. Illusions undoubtedly exist
amongst working-class people that the growth figures signify some light
at the end of the tunnel. But these hopes will be dashed.
The banks still have colossal
amounts of toxic debt – totally valueless – on their books. They are not
lending either to small or big businesses. But, even if they were, the
capitalists would be reluctant to take on loans because of the
limitations of the market, the stagnation and collapse of demand. At
best, therefore, the scenario confronting world capitalism is that of
Japan over the two lost decades from 1990. In truth, for the
capitalists, this is a better situation than if they were facing an
outright ‘depression’.
Preparing for mass struggle
THE MOST IMPORTANT change
that will register in the minds of the masses is that this ‘brave new
world’ will not be like the pre-crisis one at all. On the contrary, the
capitalist economists have lined up to say as much. With one voice they
speak of the pain necessary, although not for them, the ‘trustees’ who
have landed the world in this situation. No, it is the working class who
will pay. They all agree that the problem of problems for this year and
beyond is ‘sovereign debt’, just as in the previous two years it was
‘bankers’ debt’. In effect, the actions of capitalist governments
represented a colossal swindle perpetrated against the working and
middle classes. Private debt was transferred to the state and has become
part of sovereign debt.
Yet the Financial Times, in
the editorial mentioned above, gloated that this is "no triumphant
return of the state". Truly hypocritical double-dealing! It was
precisely the state that stepped in to rescue capitalism in the bank
bail-outs. Now, sovereign debt – the accumulated debts of the state –
partly the result of these bail-outs and the effects of the economic
crisis itself, must be paid for with the pain inflicted on the working
class.
But they are not sure that
the working class will swallow the medicine. Gillian Tett, one of the
more perceptive commentators of the Financial Times, on the BBC
programme, Newsnight, blurted out that it was not certain that sovereign
debts could be adequately cut without provoking ‘revolution’! This
stunning admission was passed over in silent embarrassment by the other
panellists. But she was right. A revolution, first in the outlook and
consciousness of the working class, will result from this crisis. Once
the working class’s hopes of a quick exit from the present travails are
dissipated, a social explosion will take place in Britain, on a European
level, and worldwide.
In Britain there could be a
holding back of the working class in the run-up to the general election,
but even this is not at all certain. There is an element of what we saw
in 1978-79, in the so-called ‘winter of discontent’. Besieged by rising
food and fuel bills, an inexorable rise in unemployment, with more
workers sinking into poverty, strikes and demonstrations are not at all
ruled out. All three main parties can agree that six million
public-sector workers must accept a wage freeze. However, that is not
how the working class sees it, as illustrated by the poll which showed
that the majority of civil servants, for instance, will not accept a
restricted 1% increase in wages in the next year. Undoubtedly, they will
be joined by teachers and local government workers. Therefore, the scene
is set for a mighty collision – whether this is before the election or
afterwards is not decisive – which will transform the social and
political situation in Britain and internationally.
The alternative to this bankrupt system
IT IS LARGELY through
experience that the mass of working-class people learn about the bitter
class realities of capitalist society. But this can be enormously
speeded up if they have behind them a party helping them to draw all the
necessary conclusions from the crisis and what it means for them, their
families and workmates, etc. This is where the genuine left has a
crucial role to play in preparing the ground for the emergence of a new
mass political alternative for working-class people in Britain.
The idea that, perhaps after
a defeat, Labour will swing left and will once more be transformed into
a vehicle which working people can use in the struggle against
capitalism has been dispelled by the disgusting manoeuvres and arguments
deployed by the corrupt careerists who infest New Labour today. They are
interested in one thing: saving their own political skins, and not
protecting and mobilising working-class people for struggle. Brown
allegedly gives us a ‘whiff of class struggle’ in his attacks on David
Cameron’s privileged background. Immediately, Tessa Jowell and New
Labour’s ‘prince of darkness’, Lord Mandelson, rushed to assure the
capitalists that relying on the ‘working class’ and Labour’s ‘core vote’
will not guarantee electoral success. The core vote has long dissipated.
And the working class is massively disillusioned with New Labour.
True, when the lines are
drawn, the older generation may mobilise, not for New Labour but to stop
the new version of Thatcherism in the form of Cameron coming to power.
But the new generation, who have no memory of Thatcher or the Tories,
threaten to abstain in huge numbers. In fact, this is itself a feature
of the organic crisis of capitalism. Votes in elections have fallen
systematically since 1951, but particularly since the advent of New
Labour and the eradication of any class differences between the main
parties.
This is a phenomenon that has
been repeated worldwide. In Ukraine, a presidential candidate changed
his name to ‘Against all’, as voters there are allowed to vote for this
on the ballot paper. He has been emulated in one London borough where a
potential candidate has changed his name to ‘None of the above’. This
political nihilism reflects the total disillusionment of a vast swathe
of the electorate with all the capitalist parties. If there was a
similar category in Britain to register opposition as in Ukraine, the
turnout in elections would probably increase substantially! But this is
not the solution. A new mass workers’ party is. Even the enthusiasm for
Obama, which led to an increased turnout compared to previous elections
in the US, can be dissipated by his retreat on healthcare reform and the
inexorable rise in unemployment, as well as Afghanistan, which is now
his war.
In Europe, the undermining of
‘traditional’ formations, like the social democracy in Germany,
continues apace. Yes, some workers will vote for these parties, holding
their noses, but only because a new alternative has not been created.
The way to answer the Financial Times and the capitalists is to make
sure that a socialist left, in which powerful Marxist forces are
present, is built in the coming year. In the first instance, this must
be channelled into building a new political alternative and, at the same
time, renovating the trade unions to become fighting instruments of the
working class once more.
Pessimism and the gloom of
the ruling class are well founded. For them, the crisis is not just
economic. Their institutions – parliament, the legal system, ‘democracy’
itself – are in crisis. So is their ‘morality’: their ideological raison
d’être. Socialists and Marxists counterpose to their tawdry, moth-eaten
‘moral’ code the simple axiom: what enhances the understanding of the
working class and its power to change society is moral and progressive.
Everything which impedes this is politically amoral, to be opposed.
Capitalism and all those parties and leaders who seek to perpetuate this
system of inequality, wars, poverty and suffering are condemning the
majority to a nightmare world and future.
Their system is in disarray
and cannot offer any long-term future for the mass of the people on the
planet. Indeed, it threatens further environmental calamity and the
depletion of precious resources, which can also lead to wars, like the
struggle over water and even massive food shortages in the next period.
The only way to banish this horrific prospect is to indict capitalism,
to explain that it is the inherent contradictions within it that have
led to this situation. At the same time, it is necessary to raise the
socialist banner, to explain the kind of society that can eliminate the
horrors of capitalism and open up a new undreamed of future for
generations to come: socialism in Britain and the world.