Demise Of Capitalism Research Articles

Rifkin’s misreadings of the zero-marginal cost of production of information technology

In this paper, I address contemporary attacks on rationalism thanks to Rifkin’s concepts of “extreme productivity” and “zero marginal cost of production” as examples of an ideological twist on genuine economic expressions. The main issue dealt with epistemological issues in the context of the contemporary communication age. It consists to clarify the relation between economic ideas and their relation to reality. To proceed accordingly, I implement a hermeneutic method applied to Rifkin’s discourse. That method is grounded in the scholarly tradition of “the ordinary language philosophy”. Its results proceed to show 2 distinct language games at work: 1- the neoclassical definition of marginal cost and its own logic is distinct from Rifkin’s use of it. 2- Rifkin uses the expression “marginal cost” under the auspices of an ideological discourse on the demise of capitalism. 3- The confusion is based on a systematically deceptive use of scholarly referencing. I conclude by drawing some lessons for the role of a multidisciplinary defense of economic rationality in contemporary discourse.

Will Stock Buybacks Cause the Demise of Capitalism?

Like previous economic systems, the capitalist system may be exposed to built-in mechanisms leading to its demise. One serious candidate to ruin capitalism is the practice of companies repurchasing their own shares. In this paper we extend the famous Warren Buffet analogy on CEO Fred Futile to show how unconstrained share buybacks could cause the demise of capitalism.

Critical Pedagogy and the Decolonial Option: Challenges to the Inevitability of Capitalism

The demise of capitalism was theoretically prophesied by Marx who posited that the world would come to such a state of destruction and human suffering that no amount of coercion or concessions would suffice to stop the massive uprisings that would lead us into a new socialist alternative. Although the downfall of world capitalism may seem ludicrous, we are seeing multiple examples of uprisings across the world and must seize this moment of possibility. Drawing on revolutionary critical pedagogy and decolonial theory, the authors argue that we must look to the subalterns whose geopolitical position of oppression and their experiences with class struggle may provide important models from which we may build future socialist movements. Specifically, the authors discuss briefly some of the successes of the Cuban and Bolivarian revolutions.

On the possibility that the revolution that will end capitalism might fail to usher in communism

This article argues that further development of John Holloway’s approach in Change the World without Taking Power and Crack Capitalism needs to address two objections: first, some of the tendencies and practices described by Holloway as ‘screams’ and ‘cracks’ may contribute to the emergence of communism (that is, universal human emancipation), but may not cause the demise of capitalism; second, some practices that are (subjectively or objectively) anti-capitalist may not be emancipatory but, to the contrary, reactionary. The need is suggested to take reactionary forms of anti-capitalism, especially fascism, stronger into account. It is proposed to distinguish two dimensions of the negation of capitalism, namely in the sense of, on the one hand, revolution that ends capitalism, and, on the other hand, revolution that ushers in communism, in order to be able to keep both dimensions in sight simultaneously.

Capitalism, Christianity, America: Rethinking the Issues

Appreciative of the points made by all four commentators, William Connolly seeks to clarify some issues and modify a few positions taken in his book Capitalism and Christianity, American Style (2008). Philip Goodchild's account of "resonance" is superb, but I hesitate over his tendency to argue that the demise of capitalism is inevitable. Catherine Keller deepens the theological issues pursued in my book, as she shows additional ways to open "theopoetic" connections between those who pursue deep, multidimensional pluralism. David Howarth makes important links between my position and that of Ernesto Laclau, and he joins me in resisting those who eschew engagement with the state as they fight off the neoliberal/evangelical machine. I use the occasion of this dialogue to explore further the relations between conceptions of immanence and those of transcendence. Kathy Ferguson admirably shows how the experience of grief by evangelical women opens a possible door to engagements of agonistic respect. In each engagement I try to follow some of the suggestions and to add a couple of my own.

Marxism and Military Spending

In Marx versus Marxists on Role of Military Production in Capitalist Economies, Fred M. Gottheil questions insights of modern Marxists on relationship of military production to advanced capitalism. He argues that military production, far from supporting operation of capitalism, contributes to a falling profit rate and, consequently, demise of capitalism. Gottheil further charges that the Marxist contention that military production explains capitalism's stayingpower is outside Marxian lexicon (p. 571). His analysis suffers from an unsophisticated Marxism and an oversimplification of economics of military spending.

From Substance to Form: The Legal Theories of Pashukanis and Edelman

The history of the 20th century is replete with a welter of state and legal forms to which theory cannot remain indifferent. Over the last eighty years, capitalism has existed with fascism, laissez-faire and interventionist-welfare states with formally representative or autocratic governments, with or without working class parties. It has become, by now, a convention to claim that, Gramsci excepted, classic Marxism does not offer a general theory of law and the state applicable to capitalist or communist societies. As with many verities the value of this convention should not go unchecked. And to observe that the state will wither away with the demise of capitalism is simply not sufficient (Bahro, 1978). Thus it is encouraging to find the emergence of a lively debate over the nature of the capitalist state and its laws. In America and England for example, instrumentalist theories flourish, albeit not without widespread criticism. The critique of instrumentalism has been a major theme in recent Marxist literature on law and the state. The instrumentalist position characterizes the state as directly controlled by a ruling class who uses it as a weapon to advance bourgeois interests, especially in relation to other classes. Critics have held that this perspective exaggerates the unity of the ruling class and neglects the partial independence of the state from ruling class control in capitalist societies. However, instrumentalism fails to distinguish legal from extralegal coercion and thus does not identify what is unique about law. Nor does it explain why the ruling class resorts to law when it rules. French structural Marxism, particularly Althusser and Poulantzas, has given the study of the state a new direction. Here the focus is on the relationship between state action and objective class structure. This relation need not (and generally does not) involve the capture of the state by a single class. From this perspective, what make a capitalist state capitalist is not direct control by capitalists but its existence in a capitalist totality, and its functioning to reproduce necessary capitalist social relations, economic and non-economic. In light of these theoretical developments, alternatives to instrumentalist perspectives on law one important product of state action are of particular interest. In this article we will present a comparison and critical assessment of two attempts those of Evgeny Pashukanis and Bernard Edelman to develop formalist Marxist analyses of law. Pashukanis, a prominent Soviet legal scholar, developed his commodity exchange theory of law in the 1920s, partly in opposition to Second International instrumentalism. And while the commodity exchange theory differs in its political implications from contemporary structuralism, Pashukanis' work has recently been revived by among others Edelman, a French Althusserian jurist and philosopher. Both formalist Marxian legal theorists seek to establish alternatives to the deeply flawed instrumentalist tradition.