Capital's War on the People
By Ismael Hossein-zadeh
ATC 149, November-December 2010
INSTEAD OF CALLING the recent G-20’s brutal austerity declaration (issued at the conclusion of its annual summit in Toronto) an orchestrated declaration of class war on the people, many progressive/Keynesian economists and other liberal commentators simply call it “bad policy.” While it is true that, as these commentators point out, the Hooverian message of the declaration is bound to worsen the recession, it is nonetheless not a matter of “bad” policy; it is a matter of class policy.
For the powerful international financial gamblers the declaration is a good, not bad, policy. Indeed, it represents a monumental victory for these gamblers — an economic coup — as it converts tens of trillions of their gambling losses into gains by having their bought-and-paid-for governments force the people to cut back on bread and butter in order to pay for the fraudulent credit claims of the financial moguls.What is bad for the people is a boon for the captains of high finance, the main architects of the G-20’s policies. Viewing the savage class war of the ruling kleptocracy on the people’s living and working conditions as “bad” policy, and hoping somehow — presumably through smart arguments and sage advice — to replace it with the “good” Keynesian policy of stimulus, reflects the rather naïve supposition that policymaking is a matter of technical expertise or the benevolence of policymakers, without a fight, without grassroots involvement and/or pressure.
A closely related flaw of the liberal/Keynesian “bad policy” argument against the neoliberal austerity strategy stems from the optimistic perception that views State power as above economic or class interests. Liberal critics of vicious austerity policies passionately argue against such policies as “bad,” “misguided” or “unwise” as if the governments that make such policies do not know what they are doing.
Accordingly, these critics offer all kinds of elegant arguments in favor of stimulus deficit spending that could lead to improved economic conditions, increased tax revenues, and decreased debt and deficit. The fact is, however, that
the governments imposing austerity policies serve as bailiffs or debt-collecting agencies on behalf of their corporate/financial masters — an elite guided by the imperatives of big capital, especially finance capital.It is time to change the parameters of the debate, from “when or by how much social spending should be cut?” to “why should the people pay for something they are not responsible for?” It is time to turn the tables and start asking:
Why should the Wall Street gamblers not pay to rebuild the economy they drove to ruins, or pay the debt they accumulated?Read the full article at:
http://www.solidarity-us.org/node/3091
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
