´´The Obeidience of fools and the guidance of wise men ´´ Oscar Wilde.
Emilio, Bachunin predicted that ;
”They [the Marxists] maintain that only a dictatorship—their dictatorship, of course—can create the will of the people, while our answer to this is: No dictatorship can have any other aim but that of self-perpetuation, and it can beget only slavery in the people tolerating it; freedom can be created only by freedom, that is, by a universal rebellion on the part of the people and free organization of the toiling masses from the bottom up.´´
—Mikhail Bakunin, Statism and Anarchism[36
Of course the narratives on the failure of Socialism per se are pretty unreliable and not exactly the progeny of thoroughgoing objective analysis, what is handed down is very much a propagandised State monopoly Capitalism endorsed version of The fall of the Berlin Wall onwards and of what the ´´Cold War´´was all about.
What of the current massive failure of Capitalism and the current hegemon.
The problem as I see it is that the Urbanisation contingent to industrialisation creates a disjoint between Nature and self-sufficiency/independence. Previous writers like Thomas Paine, Bakunin Krotopkin Marx Lenin Stalin had a good appreciation of the primitive accumulation that was essential to the Invention of Capitalism. The Dark Satanic Mills when they are discarded leave urban populations that are redundant and serve only as a reminder to those in work with next to nothing what, Nothing looks like.
The modern analogue to primitive accumulation would be coercive aggregation.
rogerglewissays: June 7, 2011 at 5:55 am This Theme is a very strong one in considering the continuing crisis both in respect of Sovereign debt crises and the double dip in the Housing Markets. There are uncomfortable parallels with Primitive accumulation. The concentration of Wealth and capital going on presently I see as part of the process the Coercive aggregation is a logical corollary of a System that becomes totally concentrated into an Oligarchic Corporate state. Reply
Anchardsays: June 7, 2011 at 10:00 am Roger: Thank you for the comment – the concept of coercive aggregation is something that I’ve become very interested in (and needed to make up a name for) across a number of settings, and it’s reassuring to see that I’m not the only one who sees similarities across many of these crises. And it does relate to primitive accumulation, though I’m not to the point of looking at aggregation as an inherent feature of capitalism in the way that someone like David Harvey might. I think it’s perhaps closer to my intent to say that coercive aggregation can act as a diffusion mechanism for market risk that operates independently of intent, and that it’s a result of decisions made out of political expedience (or ideological bent) rather than an inevitable outcome of the existence of markets. You might have seen this already, but in case you haven’t, Saskia Sassen is doing some interesting work with PA. This one is a good place to start: http://www.columbia.edu/~sjs2/PDFs/savage.pdf
Thomas Paine, Henry George and others have also noted the rise of poverty with the rise of ´´Civilisation´´
John Thelwall compared the “gigantic mind of Thomas Paine” to Licinius and Gracchus, authors of the agrarian law of ancient Rome. In Agrarian Justice, Paine develops the argument that “all individuals have legitimate birthrights in a certain species of property.” Here is where he distinguishes natural from artificial property, personal property from capital. Paine asks us to consider the Indians of North America, because among them “those spectacles of human misery which poverty and want present to our eyes in all the towns and streets in Europe” do not exist. Poverty, he deduces, is man-made, created by civilization. Paine relies on his own empirical encounters with American Indians. In 1777 he led a diplomatic delegation to Easton, Pennsylvania, to meet with scores of members of the Six Nations of the Iroquois Confederacy led by Chief Last Night. The earth is “the common property of the human race,” he writes. Its cultivation without indemnification has created poverty and wretchedness. The landed interest took the property of the dispossessed, partly by “the agrarian law of the sword.”
One day in 1871 George went for a horseback ride and stopped to rest while overlooking San Francisco Bay. He later wrote of the revelation that he had:
I asked a passing teamster, for want of something better to say, what land was worth there. He pointed to some cows grazing so far off that they looked like mice, and said, ‘I don’t know exactly, but there is a man over there who will sell some land for a thousand dollars an acre.’ Like a flash it came over me that there was the reason of advancing poverty with advancing wealth. With the growth of population, land grows in value, and the men who work it must pay more for the privilege.