The future of a capitalist society

by Adam Leyland

Three years on from the 2008 economic crash, Britain and Europe’s debt crisis is spiralling out of control again. The future of the world economy is uncertain.

Another recession – or worse – could be on the horizon.

With countries like Italy and Greece unable to pay back billions of pounds to their lenders, bailout packages are being arranged.

Similar actions temporarily rescued Ireland and Portugal from dire straits recently, and the hope is that the same actions will work again.

Italy is currently the primary concern for European countries arranging the bailout.

It is the eighth richest country in the world, and the future of the Euro and the Eurozone could rest upon how Italy’s deficit, which is roughly £1 trillion, is dealt with. Many fear the country is “too big to bail out”.

If capitalism continues in its current form worldwide, it might have to do so with changes to trading, such as more accountability from financial institutions, and a possible tax on financial transactions – such as the widely discussed ‘Robin Hood’ and ‘Tobin’ taxes.

Public figures in Britain and the US have thrown their weight behind such ideas, attracted by how much money a larger tax could mean for the economy.

Government reactions to the continuing Occupy movements worldwide are as imprecise as the fate of the Euro and the Eurozone.

Damaged faith in the economy

What is clear is that across the world, many people are unhappy with the current economic system, with recent and current anti-capitalist protests being the biggest we have seen in the Western World for decades.

It seems some people’s faith in the economy has been damaged, and it might take substantial policy changes to satisfy them.

Some of the protesters from the Occupy London Stock Exchange movement – part of the worldwide Occupy protests – have camped outside St. Paul’s Cathedral for more than a month. They are part of a world-wide uprising against the current state of capitalism.

“We are the 99%”, they argue; based on the fact that the richest 1% of the population control so much of the world’s financial means.

With their recent occupation of an empty building in the City, owned by the bank UBS, and eviction orders being issued against Occupy protesters worldwide, this story refuses to leave front pages around the world.

Much debate surrounds the ‘anti capitalist’ protests, but so far, few realistic solutions are being brought forward.

Arts London News asked four experts with strong opinions, including the former Mayor, Ken Livingstone: Does capitalism have a future?

 

Einy Shah, 21, Youth Advisor and Deputy Chair for London Conservative Future

“More people than you would imagine in the Conservative Party think the protesters have a point. I bet you did not expect that from a centre-right Conservative activist, did you?

There is no doubt we have a problem with inequality in this country – this fundamental point is undisputed – even the most submissive of right-wingers would agree.

However, from what I have witnessed – your ‘average Joe’ is against the movement. The simple reason being the protesters camping outside St Paul’s are not the 99%.

How many of you can afford to miss even a day at university or work? If I miss a lecture, I know the hassle I have to go through. My father has not taken a day off from work in years because he cannot afford to.

How many of you think we live in an ‘undemocratic country’? If similar protests were set up in North Korea or Pakistan, the authorities would not be as considerate.

Finally, how many of you agree on a ‘tax on the City’? Any type of tax on the City would not only harm our competitiveness as a global powerhouse but a tax on London’s financial district would inevitably cause a domino effect – hitting the most vulnerable and poorest first.

The point I am trying to stress is that the small number of protesters marking the Occupy movement in London are not the 99%.”

Ken Livingstone, 65, London Mayoral candidate

“This is a good question to be asking – there are very few people alive in Britain who can remember a worse economic situation than now."

What the global protests highlight is the incredibly wide disparity in the incomes and lifestyle of the 1% compared to the 99%. This is a direct and disastrous consequence of many of the policies that have been pursued in all the main industrialised countries over decades.

There is an alternative. It is possible to harness the enormous levels of wealth created by people across the globe and use it for their benefit. For growth, we need to deepen links with the rest of the world and investment. And that wealth must be used to make sure that all citizens benefit, not just the 1%.

London’s present direction stands for the opposite. From delivering jobs, housing, growth or fairness, there is rising unemployment. Ordinary Londoners are struggling while bankers count their bonuses.

We have a Mayor with a second job, working for the Daily Telegraph, that pays him a second salary of £250,000, which he calls ‘chickenfeed’. He has had more meetings with bankers than the police.

These are the policies of the Conservative party, whether in Whitehall or City Hall. Instead of putting the 1% first, London needs a course that puts all Londoners as a whole first.”

 

 

Anne Marie Mortensen, 40, originally from America, is a member of the Occupy London Stock Exchange movement. She is currently studying for an MA in photography at CSM

“I have lived in capitalist societies my entire life. I thoroughly believed that I would forever be a capitalist, of sorts. So, my own position now surprises me.

After having researched a variety of philosophers and economists on the matter, the one thing they are all in agreement with is that capitalism is the ownership of capital and that capital refers to money, assets, property et cetera.

Just about anything can be turned into capital, and it is. Unfortunately, corporations have allowed the human factor to be sidelined, in favour of market forces.

The basic necessities that sustain life on earth – such as water – have already turned into a discussion of ownership. Air might be the next commodity to be traded. The market is immoral and it will always sell to those who can buy, not to those who are in need.

Corporations operating under the free market banner have lead to growing economic inequalities. Though the 1% owners do not see it that way. If people cannot pay for something, well that is just their tough luck.

Or, in comes the attitude of, ‘Let’s give them jobs and then they can pay for our goods. We are actually doing them a favour.’ As soon as ownership enters the equation, relationships between human beings become secondary.

For example, employees of publicly traded companies, such as banks, are legally obliged to endeavour to make profit for their shareholders. It is a vicious cycle that everyone is involved with, however indirectly.

In order for capitalism to have a future, it requires an in-built humanitarian mind-set in governments or corporations.

But capitalism has reinvented itself through the centuries, so there is hope. The real question is one of ownership.”

 

 

Daniel Morley, 26, is a former student at University of East Anglia and current member of the UAL Marxist Society

“Our economy has been in glorious large-scale decline for decades. There is a major crisis because of the capitalist system. That crisis is overproduction. Karl Marx recognised this 150 years ago, and the reason for it is that working people are not paid for the full value of what they produce. As long as capitalism in its current form exists, there will be overproduction.

There will be booms and periodic crises. The workers of the world need to have a say in how factories and institutions are run. All of the wealth of society comes from human labour.

The same people who create that wealth through their hard work should be able to control the dominant sectors of the economy. The sectors should be taken over by the state and then democratically run by the people.

Marx pointed to two fundamental contradictions in capitalism. One is private ownership and production for profit. The other is the nation state. As capitalism was built and founded because of the nation state, it is inevitable that production and productive capacity is limited – because of the nation state.

What we have now is a very different capitalism. Before, there were more small companies competing among themselves. What we have now is about 400 gigantic companies that dominate the world market, which is another contradiction of capitalism, because it is anything but competitive.

It is crying out for social ownership. The Financial Times did an article a few years back, saying that it could be 20 years before we get back to the employment levels we had in 2007.

That is 20 years of a million young people unemployed, 20 years of austerity and 20 years of education cuts, and if there are not fundamental changes or an overhaul of capitalism, that is the future we can expect for our children.”