This comes from Peter Dawe, a fairly regular commentator on the blog from what I do not think he will mind me saying is a contrarian perspective:
Now the whole economy is controlled by the governments of the world, are we now in a socialist utopia?
I am not going to offer much comment. I am going to leave that for others.
Suffice to say that I think the argument is flawed at many levels.
First, I am not in the slightest bit convinced the whole economy is controlled by governments: I think the power of finance remains absolutely paramount and is simply being reinforced by government at present.
Second, socialism is about motivation. I am not seeing a socialist motivation by the governments now seeking to control economic activity.
Third, at present the likely outcomes of interventions look to be horribly like those that arose in 2008, where wealth was supported, inequality was increased and the status quo was maintained.
We might be heading for a populist or fascist paradigm then. But in that case getting a social democratic solution out of this is going to be very hard. And a socialist one would, in any case, be far too focused on material issues for it to be remotely green enough to be sustainable.
So a green / red solution is required - which is brown. And we're not heading there as yet. But socialism is even more remote. A hard right solution is the direction of travel - and remember, they love nothing more than the control of the state to benefit corporate interests.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Seems to me that the desire to end “lockdown”, is driven by the need to stop people considering how the state pays for the current situation. The media is also pushing the “pay it back” scenario, in order to make sure no radical solutions are allowed to gain a foothold.
Socialism is not getting a look in.
I see The Times they are a changing …
Can’t say anymore succinctly than this tweet.
‘Has anybody reminded The Sunday Times that they had ample opportunities to back a pro-NHS, pro-evidence, pro-properly-funded-public-services Labour leader but they chose to smear Corbyn in favour of Boris “take it on the chin” Johnson and the ToryScum asset-strippers?’
https://mobile.twitter.com/dinogoldie/status/1251599189768839169?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
Even Times and Telegraph readers/staff have elderly parents and grand parents whom I’m sure they love and may have seem what is going on (I’m not sure about Daily Mail and Express readers – they seem to hate everyone).
Maybe it is this that has caused the Johnson fans to get angry?
No PSR,
It’s the weekly death stat to 10th April due out Tuesday that is the cause for the new narrative management today.
Peter assumes that the world is a rational place. It is not, as your other correspondents have pointed out, this is a world driven by emotion, turbo charged by the internet. Further:
1) The world was in pretty bad shape before a virus took hold – Syria, Yemen, Hungary, Russia, China versus the world and a United States that does not give a fuck about anyone. Also the possible fragmentation of the EU is still on the cards.
2) Covid-19’s effects on domestic economies will make countries think about themselves first because they will worry about being voted back in. In many ways, normal democracy should be suspended at time’s like this and national unity Governments should be the way forward for human beings. But apparently not!
3) Most of the post war consensus building institutions have basically failed us for one reason or the other (mostly because they are all too often based in the USA). They have been captured by finance or adversarial thinking from American capitalism.
4) The nature of contagion is bound to create a ‘pull up the drawbridge mentality’ in most nation states and this will also affect other policy areas.
5) There are those out there who will see Covid-19 as an opportunity and the last thing they want is international co-operation.
6) The Left is still a very weak force as it has not had the imagination to re-invent itself as Eric Hobsbawm observed. The Left has been in decline in this country since Harold Wilson and has plateaued – flat-lined actually – across Europe. The Left needs to be more than just the Right with a conscience.
So sorry Peter – my answer to the question is No.
Surely socialism is about ownership of the means of production. I see nothing to suggest any change of ownership, except where small businesses have to put themselves in even more hock to the big banks. In many key areas Britain doesn’t even have the means of production.
On your last sentence. I suspect that we will see a period of ‘deglobalisation.’ Supply chains will need to be more resilient. Whether that’s a good thing or not is another matter but just outsourcing production of everything is now a busted flush.
If we have socialist thinking it probably won’t be along internationalist lines. It won’t be workers of the world unite for some time.
Similarly in terms of ownership of production might the state start taking stakes? That’s identifiable as socialist I guess. Foreign ownership might drop out of fashion.
What do you intend to do about the current ‘foreign ownership’ of UK companies?
What do you suggest of OUR ownership of foreign companies?
We live on a pale blue dot in the vastness of the solar system and galaxy and universe.
There is NO ‘foreign’.
Get it?
First, it was a tease! I hope the idea amused some!
Second, I look at the global situation, not just the UK or indeed the West’s, perspective
Third, Isn’t a valid definition of socialism, “When the government is defining the economic activity of the nation. OWNING an asset, and not being in control, in no ownership at all.” State mandated mortgage holidays and rent holidays are in effect govt ownership
Fourth, The majority of peoples income is now from government
Yes, many governments (including the UK) are not equitable in their allocation of resources, But every socialist government fails that test.
Peter, Surely surely surely no one could have seen it as anything other than an amusing piece of irony
well words like ‘utopia’ & ‘socialism’ are plucked from the lexicon of ideologies,
I’m not sure if they’re real things, more aspirations, ideals that have never really manifested in reality,
they mean different things to different people, there is no clear & commonly held definition of what a socialist utopia would be, nirvana for some, a nightmare for others, actual nonsense for most.
we do have a much better common understanding of what an economy, a government and the world is,
I think it’s always important to remember that the economy is actually all of us, the sum total of all our activity, we are the economy,
it’s not something that belongs to someone else who kindly allow us to participate,
and broadly speaking a government is considered to be the official representation of the collective will of the people, whether through a process of democratic election or swept to power as a committee by some glorious peoples revolution,
either way it only governs by consent of the people and can either be voted out or rounded up and shot and then replaced by something more to the peoples liking,
I think I can safely say we all regard the world as our home and somewhat indispensable.
so maybe the most important thing in that question is the word ‘control’
what is control, do we have control of ourselves, do we accept cedeing some of our self control to collective control when we agree to collaborate together in social and economic activity?
do we like being in control, do we like being controlled, will we tolerate being totally controlled?
I’ve read a bit of Richard Dawkins and he has helped me get an idea of how we’ve evolved into who we are today,
we appear to have managed to self domesticate ourselves as a species over time by ganging up on and bashing the heads in of those that are just too anti social and disruptive for the common good of our groups,
by self interested altruism and mutual co operation we’ve managed to build quite a large, complex civilisation which is tolerant and sociable,
from a behavioural point of view we’re remarkable as the only species of ape that can pack 150,000 individuals into a stadium to watch a sporting event without everyone screeching, flinging their poop at each other and gouging each others eyes out,
so really, collectively, we are the economy, we are capable of self control and we are remarkably sociable for apes,
and governments are only ceeded a degree of control by our consent and ought to remember that they are really only a vote, bullet, rope, axe or guillotine blade drop from redundancy.
maybe we are living in a sociable Apetopia?
Don’t knock it Peter – enjoy your place in the sun.
1) Governments of the world in one form or another have been in control of the world (global society) ever since society developed, so nothing to worry about or has changed there.
2) Socialism is a noble idea & a human idealistic construct, much like society, which becomes more realistic the greater the number of people believe & so have confidence in it.
3) Utopia is a human idealistic construct, something that is created in the mind, an aspiration if you will.
4) Much like perfection or true happiness they are all impossible to attain; it is the belief & noble pursuit of them all that makes them feel realistic & enables tangible progress towards them to be acquired.
5) I shall have to defer to Tantalus & Sisyphus here. We will forever by tantalisingly close towards our pursuit of what we collectively believe is better for ourselves & society.
6) What we must not allow is for our fellows to become apathetic, ambivalent, apostatic, discouraged or despondent.
7) It is our moral duty & imperative that we must rise up our fellows as best we can, enabling them to aspire to & attain their own opportunity to be equal amongst all in society & better yet never have let them stumble or fall in the first instance.
Belief in self, derives from belief in others.
8) Money isn’t everything, but it is the only thing….the only thing that creates opportunities that enable a person to pursue & share with others, eventually.
Our collective efforts of a global society give rise to the ‘economy.’
My final answer. All are figments of our imagination & so despite being engaged with them realistically, something we all face daily; we can only choose to believe on the basis of what we perceive & encounter.
One thing is a certainty if you deprive people of meaningful ability to access opportunities they will become disillusioned & disenfranchised, hence why it is imperative for £ to flow through the economy without undue hinderance.
If you ask everyone what ONE thing would improve their lives – they will always say Money.
Even most of these who have more than enough.
Your last paragraph explains why people turn to drug dealing and petty crime. Because many are “disillusioned & disenfranchised”
A UBI would remove that and let EVERYONE follow their paths to contentment – be it education, creativity or making more money than they will ever spend!
Wrong, the answer is SECURITY. But many people use Money as a proxy for security.
I tend to agree with you Peter
The first answer people give to ,,OST question s is the wrong one
Working out what they actually want is important and takes time
Maslow did not have money on his hierarchy of needs
That may be a clue here