FIrst of all, a disclaimer. I'm not Leftist.
Although I agree with them sometimes, as I do with the certain ideas on the right.
So. Now that I've alientated you all completely:
Here is a little piece I liked even though I am not a leftist bla bla bla....
It's on ... ecosalon.com http://ecosalon.com/environmental-crisis-capitalism/#
It concerns obvious faults of the capitalist system:
the system’s built-in drive to generate radical imbalances of personal wealth. Enabling this process are the assumptions and conclusions of mainstream economists. They love math...
this kind of thing has numerous parallels with my own "work" - my ideas, labor or whatever----I.e., the engagements I have been engaging for some time now.
labor? There is, of course, an idea of materialism vs. idealism. This is a pre-occupation Marx and Engels have in "German Ideology." Thought vs. work, the "poverty of philosophy," the "ideological superstructure" vs. Material Base, etc.
Now if I could only figure out how to "backlink" cuz I don' know how; but you get the website above so you can go As for the mystery of what "trackback" is, I don' kno. OK. It'll come, I guess.
this kind of thing (esp, the "imbalances of personal..." part of the quote) has numerous parallels with my own work. I think I said that, didn't I? Altho I am very much into this matter of notions of economists and what they do, and also very much into the matter of their "math interest," whic b.t.w. assumes rather than shows that math is relevant to economics, let's look just at the beginning---at the statement, quoted above, that the system has a
"...built-in drive to generate radical imbalances [of personal wealth]."
One thing is true: capitalism has its own particular characteristics. My idea is that in order to go forward, and even in order to stay in one place, we need to move on to a new stage of capitalism; that will NOT necessarily just happen by itself. (this idea that it just happens by itself seems like a rather dumb idea actually, but they believe it...so what can you do!?)
How modify? The aspect to modify is one that would impact just this particular characteristic of "radical imbalances," or the fact that wealth builds up in some areas more than in others. As in geographical areas, I mean.
So then the situation is that what you have is countries (this is inter-country but not to say that intra-country is less important) that have, say persons making two hundred dollars per day vs. other areas or countries in which the persons make one dollar per day. You get the idea, right? And this is the big onus that nobody in the mainstream media talks about. I am not talking about just a few persons, in any case. There is a big difference between persons; there is a big difference between countries.
So, the story up 'til now, is that we have the glaring contrast that they (i.e. humans) used to call, in the 50s or 60s, "The haves and the have-nots." Now we pretend that these malnourished persons do not exist. Just like the Israelis do---there is extensive literature and numerous suggestions that some of the Israelis deny the fact of their actual existence to the Palestinians.
What I figured out a long time ago is an idea that constitutes the, presumably viable, notion of a transfer. It is like a wealth transfer, to be co-ordinated by a sort of United Nations of wealth-movement.
Were the capitalistic world to get its act together as a group (which is what after all globalization is all about) they/we could TRANSFER some wealth from one "sector" (the highly successful one) or part of capitalism to the another "sector" (the one lacking access to capitalistic resources/wealth) or part.
Now you should try and think about that: what would happen? What would be the result of doing that? Think about it and post in the "comments" box below. The rules for the comment box are that I have right to delete comments I want to delete. I'm curious to see if anyone thinks this through and what such an individual would say.