Re: [OPE-L] Keynes and Marx (German)

From: Dogan Goecmen (Dogangoecmen@AOL.COM)
Date: Mon Jan 01 2007 - 16:27:46 EST

I have difficulties to follow this logic. The way you make the point seems  
to put us before an alternative between Hayek and Keynes, between neoliberal  
parties and social democrats. But are these two positions (parties) real  
alternatives we have to accept? Or do we need to establish a third front that of  
real socialist movement based on Marx's critique of political economy. Think of 
 Owen. He criticised Malthus and laissez faire policies. though he also 
developed  ideas about how to reform capitalism in favour of working classes. 
Particularly,  in his later writings he always referred to the concept of socialism 
to  highlight the fact that there is a needs for essential change in the 
property  relations of the means of production. The socialist and working class 
movement  lost this last mentioned project just becase they thought capitalism 
was  reforming itself and there was no need for revolutionary changes.
In einer eMail vom 01.01.2007 22:10:14 Westeuropäische Normalzeit schreibt  

I would  agree with the point that you make below about co-option, but in  the
process the interests of finance capital and the colonial bourgeoisie  had to 
take second place.

But you should not deal with the state in the  abstract, abstracting from 
real political parties, their class basis and  their programatic aims. Keynes 
provided to social democracy a form of  political economy that enabled them
to at least carry out some progressive  measures. If you contrast the 
economy of Macdonald to that of  Atlee you can see the significance of the 
brought about by  Keynes.

Paul  Cockshott

-----Original  Message-----
From: OPE-L on behalf of Dogan Goecmen
Sent: Mon 1/1/2007  8:30 PM
Subject: Re: [OPE-L] Keynes and Marx  (German)

It is also necessary to take into account the  circumstances of the  class
struggle at the international level. Doing  so, it is possible to  argue
that the alliance you suggest was not  directed against finance capital  but
against the (revolutionary)  socialist movement worldwide, at a time  when
the USSR had defeated  nazism and the communists in the countries  occupied
by the Nazi army  had been among the main forces that fought the  invadors.
Communism  all over the world and the Communist parties in many  Western
European  countries increased very significantly their political   influence.
Thus, it was highly necessary for the capitalist class to  coopt  their


I find your remarks  above extreemly interesting. This is exacly the point  
that explains  the success of Keynesianism. This is also the point I was 
to  make in the passage below.

>> Der Keynesianismus,  der ein englisches Produkt  ist, ist auch in
>> diese Tradition  einzuordnen und sein Verhältnis zum  Marxismus ist
>> im Lichte  dieser Entwicklung zu sehen. Seinerzeit  musste schon der
>>  zynische liberale John Stuart Mill, der zuerst die  in  England
>> geboren Idee des Sozialismus, zum Fremdkörper  erklärte,  musste
>> unter dem Druck der Straße, ohne seinen  eklektisch liberalen  Geist
>> aufzugeben, an Marxismus  Zugeständnisse machen. Doch nach  der
>> Oktoberrevolution half  all das nicht mehr. Da musste  eine
>> konservative Theorie mit  einem linken 'Anschein' erfunden  werden.
>> In der  Wirtschaftstheorie entspricht der Keynesianismus  diesem
>>  Bedürfnis.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 31 2007 - 00:00:05 EST