Very clear exposition by by Professor Rick Wolff, Department of Economics at the University of Massachusetts – given in Amherst on October 7, 2008, from a Marxist point of view.
Capitalism Hits the Fan: A Marxian View from UVC-TV 19 on Vimeo.
Very clear exposition by by Professor Rick Wolff, Department of Economics at the University of Massachusetts – given in Amherst on October 7, 2008, from a Marxist point of view.
Capitalism Hits the Fan: A Marxian View from UVC-TV 19 on Vimeo.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
I have lived in communism – and it was not in any way similar to Silicon Valley and working there (granted I know this only from second hand – as I was too young then) was not similar to working in a small startup with a flat decision structure – but exactly the opposite – it was like working for a Sun or HP but of the size of whole country. Working for a startpup gives you autonomy – you decide on your own – the communistic system (as it was in practice) was the opposite – it was a whole country that was deciding on your very private matters.
Sympa, mais un peu simpliste, non?
C’est vrai qu’on est au MIT, alors le spectacle d’abord, la pensée ensuite 😉
Thanks for the comments Zbig. I only watched the first 20 minutes, and it struck me as an explanation of the current system, not a justification of its totalitarian alternative. Does it say so later in the video?
Michel
Thanks Michel for posting this. Those attracted to Marxist thought can see the broader picture of economic activity. I enjoyed Rick’s theatrics and passion! The solutions Rick proposes at the end I don’t consider adequate at resolving the ‘income gap’ and the ‘continued financial growth’ issue.
I’m delighted that I’m not alone with my own views that this collapse is primarily based on lack of real wages and not as many claim caused primarily by a group of people buying up homes like ravenous dogs on ‘easy credit’. The housing bubble was the most volatile, it was the first to go, and with it, the interdependent banking systems and businesses that depend on lending to function. The lack of financial growth in wages are the root cause for the mass defaults after mortgage rates soared in attempt to regain loss only to perpetuate more defaults, eventually hitting investors, ect.
Stagnant wages in an economy that demands constant financial growth cannot last. Lack of financial growth due to financial wage stagnation, fueled by value captured autonomously from productive technologies are the primary cause of this and future financial downturns.
A worker’s value is becoming captured by the machine and will continue to capture more and more value by producing without the help or assistance of a worker. This is how incomes were able to stagnate for so long as job creations continued. Even this well studied Marxist economist failed to mention that very important element.
For that reason, Rick’s conclusion that workers must be the board of directors will not work in the long term, because the workers will invent themselves out of work and leave, yet again, a few at the top to have the profits of autonomously driven productivity.
Marxism is useful for critical thought. Its the normative Marxism I have had trouble with, as much as I greatly sympathize with its attempts at ending (pure?) capitalism for the “benefit for all” and such, it just seems to greatly overlook technical advances in manufacturing, intellectual or physical, that are becoming more and more worker-less or skills driven. Perhaps its the job creation that’s muddled up this observation.
Value creation is taking place more and more outside the financial system, like in peer networks and automated productivities. This will mean a continued wage disparity, stagnation despite what job creation continues, and the continued tumbling of finance as a determinant of value and the markets that carry its numeric based torch.
Hi Michel – I was commenting on the last part of the speach where he arguments that new tech startups are at the core communistic (because of their flat hierarchy). It is hard to discuss this way – and by the way it shows that video is not the best medium for deliberation.