June
17, 2006, Volume 13 Nr. 48, Issue 216
Capitalism Requires a Great Depression.
Getting Ready for World War III. Jozef
Hand-Boniakowski
I was born in 1949 which makes me a Baby
Boomer. The people born
after World War II between the years of 1946 through 1964 in the United States
lived during a time
of expanding economic growth unmatched anywhere else in the
world. In his book Boomer Nation,
Gillion divides these people into two groups.
Gillion calls those born between 1945 and 1957, Boomers. He uses the term Shadow
Boomers to describe those born between 1958 and 1964. My wife JeanneE, born in
1958, is a Shadow Boomer. Early Boomers grew up with the civil
rights struggle, anti-Vietnam war protests, the draft, the
Beatles, Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young, the Rolling Stones,
Woodstock, the invasion of Cambodia, first man on the moon,
etc. Their younger children may be in the Shadow Boomer
group. The Boomers grew up in a
period within the United States when the expectation was that
every year the personal and family economic situation would improve
along with the improved fiscal condition of the nation. Every
year better than the previous year. The Boomers who worked hard all their lives are
now beginning to retire and the fiscal house of the United States is not in
order to provide for them in their senior years as was promised.
Harold Myerson, in "A Gentler
Capitalism" (Washington Post Jan 4, 2006) writes,
For the pervasive insecurity that
is inextricably part of today's capitalism has become the dominant
fact of modern life...The new workplace...is a brave new world of
short-term employment and relationships, where experience is not
necessarily a virtue and institutional memory is sketchy at best...the
employer-provided benefits of the past 60 years are going the way
of the dodo.
It is now common for corporations to
renege on paying out promised pensions and benefits. Corporations file for
bankruptcy and the courts expunge them from having to pay workers
their long anticipated pensions. Corporations receive court protection from having to make pension
payments. The State picks up the tab by making pension
payments through the US Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. In other words, the people
make up the shortfall by paying
themselves. It is not surprising that corporations
prefer the federal government picking up the pension tab. There are a huge number of baby
Boomers with pensions, IRAs, TSAs ready to
start collecting on their investments, annuities and Social
Security. What great
rewards corporations would accrue if these payouts were to simply disappear? On
June 16, 2006, the Houston Chronicle in an article entitled, "Delta
to Request End to Pilots' Pensions " stated,
In a letter to U.S. Sen. Johnny
Isakson, that also was sent to other members of Congress, Delta
CEO Gerald Grinstein said Delta will ask that the pilots' pension
be terminated effective Sept. 2. UAL Corp.'s United Airlines, the
nation's No. 2 carrier, did the same thing when it was in
bankruptcy protection.
The US Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation has in the past exhausted its entire multi-billion
dollar surplus as a result of big corporate
bankruptcies.
Neo-liberalism requires that money be changed into commodities so
that commodities can be transformed into money with surplus value,
i.e., profit. This exchange produces capital for the owning
class. Giving money to Boomers does nothing for the production
of surplus value. The capitalist prefers that pension and
Social Security funds be put to use anywhere other than in the retirees
hands. To the capitalist all that money is just sitting there
waiting to be invested, and re-invested. To neo-liberalism, a worker
who is not creating surplus value is
unproductive. A
worker who extracts funds from a pension is thus a
burden. So then, how to do away with pensions and Social
Security? Both
the Chicago Tribune and the New York times in their May 11, 2005
editions reported that a bankruptcy judge in Chicago ruled that
United Airlines may turn over its pension plans to the federal
government. The court determined that such a transfer was
permissible in order to help the corporation exit from bankruptcy
protection. At the time this was the largest pension default
in United States history. United Airlines employees lost
$3 billion in retirement benefits affecting more than 134,000
workers. With the loss of pensions, Social Security becomes
even more important for the working class. It is no accident
that Bush regime tried to destroy Social Security. The capitalist mindset
demands that all capital must be continuously in flux making
more capital. Should the process fail, the working class is always
called upon to make up for it through the sweat of their
labor. Those who create all the wealth always bail out those
who exploit them. Guaranteed security for the working class is anathema
to the owning class. Exploitation cannot take
place where a social safety net exists. Manipulation of the
working class is more difficult when workers have options.
Eliminate the social safety net; what
better way to avoid having to make the payouts than to bankrupt the
entire economic system? A profound depressing of the economy
facilitates the probability that pension payouts will not have to take place at all. In other words, let the
big meltdown happen so all obligations to the working class can be
expunged. Let the markets crash and let the cycle start
over. This is the "boom and bust" that is the signature of
capitalism. The bust, as Marx predicted, must take place as a
result of capitalist contradictions. The system reverts to
salvage operations as
the working class is destroyed. Anton Pannekoek writes in
"The theory of the collapse of capitalism" (1934) that
the,
The workers’ movement has not to
expect a final catastrophe, but many catastrophes, political —
like wars, and economic — like the crises which repeatedly break
out, sometimes regularly, sometimes irregularly, but which on the
whole, with the growing size of capitalism, become more and more
devastating.
In 2006, we see the continued
devastation that capitalism brings. War is clearly a necessary
component of capitalist growth. 20th century wars have
been imperialist wars, mostly of choice. And the choices are constrained by the
nature of surplus value, i.e., profit. Capitalists seldom
invest in war without capital gain in mind. The military industrial complex
and its corporate takeover of the State must always make a profit. War does that.
In the never-ending search for surplus value, capitalist enterprise manufactures
new markets that require new things, and war is a huge market.
Commodification continues until the ability to manufacture most
goods is exported, i.e., outsourced to the cheapest labor
pool. What are the unemployed and under-employed working class of then supposed to
do? The capitalist has the answer: manufacture wars that
require billions, and even trillions of dollars to execute and hire
through an economic draft the cannon fodder to execute it. What does it
matter to the capitalist how much devastation and collateral damage
is created? The twentieth century offers many examples
of how insignificant the working class is to the ruling
elite. David
Smith in "Markets are like 1987 crash" in the May 21, 2006
issue of Times Online writes,
We are very uncomfortable about
predicting financial crises, but we cannot help but see a certain
similarity between the current economic and market conditions and
the environment that led to the stock-market crash of October
1987, said David Woo, head of global foreign-exchange strategy at
Barclays Capital.
The U.S. public just keeps
on borrowing money. It is easy to blame the consumer for
borrowing beyond their means. However, most consumers go into
debt to buy the stuff they do need. A high rate of
consumer debt ad personal bankruptcy is for medical expenses and
college expenses. Most
alarmingly, the United States government continues handing out tax cuts to the
rich while borrowing billions overseas to finance its illegal war in
Iraq and other attempts at imperialist expansion.
When George W. Bush says he is exporting democracy, he
means he is imposing neo-liberalism by brute force on countries rich
in natural resources that neo-liberalism needs to survive.
This cowboy "let's just take it" mentality is failing in
Iraq. Michael Schwartz in "Neo-liberalism on crack:
cities under siege in Iraq" (Stony Brook University, June 1,
2006) writes,
Neo-liberal economic reforms have
created the 21st Century slum city, with its extensive
shanty-towns, degraded public services, and hyper unemployment.
Small pockets of the privileged maintain a life style that
resembles the ideal of capitalist prosperity, but an increasing
proportion are deprived of the accoutrements of modern life:
reliable electricity, clean water for drinking and for bathing, a
livable diet, a habitable dwelling, and a viable connection to the
economic life of the nation. In Iraq, even during the hellish
combination of Saddamist rule and UN sanctions, most Iraqis kept
this connection, albeit in constantly degrading circumstances.
With the arrival of the Americans, conditions in the cities turned
more steeply downward. And with the rise of the post-invasion war,
they went into free fall.
And just who is going to pay the bill
for the United States' cowboy diplomacy? The working people of
course. According to the doctrine of neo-liberalism,
working people who cannot cut it, who cannot come out on top in the
economic survival of the fittest deserve no assistance. The
capitalist State, vis-à-vis neo-liberalism, has no obligation to compensate for their
failure. Working class people are mere commodities
in the capitalist process who can be tossed aside when no longer
capable of valorisation, that is, of making capital. Karl Marx
used the concept of valorisation in his work, Das Kapital.
Marx describes it as process where a worker creates more than the
equivalent of his own labor value, i.e., value added beyond the cost
of labor. John
Bellamy Foster speaking on the new American view on empire as
published on the Guerilla Network News in an article entitled,
"Naked Imperialism" describes it thusly,
The causes are the waning of U.S.
economic strength, coupled with the disappearance of the Soviet
Union, which left the United States unrivaled militarily. U.S.
military spending is more than twice its share of world output.
Putting this “comparative advantage” to work is the
centerpiece in a grand strategy of forging a “New American
Century.” It means enhancing U.S. control of strategic assets
while depriving potential global and regional competitors from
controlling the same assets, thereby guaranteeing a long period of
U.S. global supremacy. But to do this the U.S. empire has to be
more aggressive and expansive, taking “preemptive” actions
against so-called “rogue states.” It also means that the
United States increasingly finds it necessary to brandish its
nuclear might.
War in perpetuity is neo-liberalism
gasping for survival. It is a gasping that necessitates paying
for such folly forever. Get ready as neo-liberalism leads the
world to a neo Great
Depression followed by the next "great" restructuring of global
capitalism by way of World War III.
Jozef Hand-Boniakowski is
co-editor and co-publisher of Metaphoria
along with his life partner and wife, JeanneE. He is 30-year
veteran retired teacher and a member of Veterans For Peace.
His writings have appeared in Metaphoria,
After Downing Street,
Buzzflash, Counterpunch,
Thomas Paine's
Corner, Rense.com, Omni
Center, Rutland Herald,
Times Argus, and
others. |