Fictitious Capital and Communism (LONG)

7 posts / 0 new
Last post
redtwister
Offline
Joined: 21-03-05
Aug 23 2005 18:15
Fictitious Capital and Communism (LONG)

While I have issues with it and find many unanswered questions, the author Loren Goldner intended this as a thought experiment, working with the implications of his ideas on fictitious capital (he and Aufheben had quite a debate about this, on Break Their Haughty Power web site). I hope people find it interesting.

cheers,

chris

Quote:

Fictitious Capital and the Transition Out of Capitalism

By Loren Goldner

The following is a “thought experiment” which attempts to see fictitious capital in relation to the end of capitalism. By pursuing the concept of fictitious capital as far as we can, by illuminating the unbelievable distortions it has fomented in what is called “economic development” on a world scale, we can highlight the nature of contemporary struggles as well as explain why there are not more struggles. We can also address the reasons why a “society beyond capitalism” seems such a remote possibility at present.

In discussing fictitious capital, we must never forget that it is subordinate to, and derivative from, capital generally. It is important not to foment the illusion that the struggle is against “fictitious capital”, leaving “real” capital itself unexamined. But at the same time, it is indispensable to sort out the fictitious dimension of the contemporary economy, if only conceptually. Many people today, including people on the radical left, regard contemporary capitalism as functioning normally, more or less the way it always has. I could not disagree more. Perhaps, as contemporary ideologies assert, capitalism has “reinvented” or is “reinventing” itself, as it has done several times in the past. Be that as it may, the post-1973 period presents one of the strangest, if not the strangest phases in the history of capitalism.

What, then, is fictitious capital?

Fictitious capital is, on first approach, paper claims on wealth (in the form of profit, interest and ground rent) in excess of the total available surplus value, plus available loot from primitive accumulation.

http://home.earthlink.net/%7Elrgoldner/program.html

Admin edit - replaced cut and paste with introduction and link to article. - catch

This text is from the Break Their Haughty Power web site at http://home.earthlink.net/~lrgoldner

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Aug 23 2005 18:42

moved!

pingtiao sent me a link to this a little while ago, although I only scanned the beginning of it at the time. Bits of it didn't quite ring true when I read it, but whether I'd be able to formulate why in any useful way I'm not sure. I'll try to check it out a bit more thoroughly though.

meanoldman
Offline
Joined: 15-01-04
Aug 23 2005 19:03

Might be worth replacing that huge cut and paste with a link to the article on their website.

I'll give readingit a go later.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Aug 23 2005 19:09
meanoldman wrote:
Might be worth replacing that huge cut and paste with a link to the article on their website.

redtwister, I've done this now, it's a bit easier to read on that site than on the forum anyway. You did ask for more moderating wink

meanoldman
Offline
Joined: 15-01-04
Aug 23 2005 19:26

Cheers catch.

I think I'll print it out, I'm not very good at reading long dense pieces of writing on a monitor. Harder to read and the distractions of libcom are much further away when reading from paper away from the computer.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Aug 23 2005 22:47

OK. Having read it, it clarifies a lot of things I've been trying to work out in terms of how surplus value can operate in sectors that don't produce tangible use-values for the working class. What hadn't really occurred to me was that although (say) a successful telesales company can extract surplus value from its workers in the same way as a factory might, it doesn't actually produce any of the things necessary for its own expansion or the reproduction of labour (phones, food, computers). I'd tended to look at this as a form of consumption masquerading as production, in the same way that the 'work' involved outside employment in consuming commodities appears to increase all the time (IKEA being a good example). Didn't get any further than that though.

Not sure about the "capitalization" of MOP, that's what struck me as odd on the first reading of it - can't imagine it makes a lot of difference compared to the property market for example (construction companies making most of their profits from property speculation rather than the surplus value from housing as a commodity built on that land - much more important than if some tools are over-valued).

The program that he puts forward is very similar to Bookchin's writing on post-scarcity (a good thing). I'm not sure whether it needs the long exposition on ficititious titles to make this point though - it's easy to work out that production has got so high that the majority of jobs are just to keep us busy, often with harmful societal and ecological effects, and that vasts amounts of involuntary labour are expended on unproductive activity whilst they could be addressing very real needs. The "stock taking of the worlds' resources" is lifted straight out of the conquest of bread as well.

A thorough examination of the extent of productive forces and natural resources available to society is something that would really be useful - "Bernie Gunther", a poster on urban75 (warning: more lefty infighting than here by a long stretch) has started a couple of discussions about this, but not for a while unless I've missed them. And Goldner's right that too much time is spent arguing about the finer differences between forms of organisation (I'm guilty of that as much as anyone), ignoring the changes in society that render many of those forms obsolete.

Do you have a link to the Goldner/Aufheben discussion? I reckon I should get onto Capital II and III before that though...

redtwister
Offline
Joined: 21-03-05
Aug 24 2005 14:56
Catch wrote:
meanoldman wrote:
Might be worth replacing that huge cut and paste with a link to the article on their website.

redtwister, I've done this now, it's a bit easier to read on that site than on the forum anyway. You did ask for more moderating ;)

Hey, works for me. Thanks catch!