the end of capitalism?

[egb_hibs]

some writers on the guardian's CiF, seem to think it's on the cards; some are positively brimming with excitement.

what say the panel - could it happen?

i personally doubt, though conceivably the great globalisation project may be derailed for a while. i can see a slim possibility of a resurgent conservative protectionism.

but in all likeliehood it'll all blow over.

it perhaps doesn't do to muddy the topic, but it may be interesting to speculate on what would happen if capitalism did go tits up. i'm not persuaded as the guardian writers are that socialism would fill it's place.

i think in a complete global collapse, aggressive nationalism would be a more likely outcome.

[Colr]

You should start a doomsday cult. Your interest in the terminal decline of the modern world is quite remarkable.

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by Colr

You should start a doomsday cult. Your interest in the terminal decline of the modern world is quite remarkable.

are you perhaps overlooking the fact that i've said i don't expect it to happen?

i do honestly believe there are converging elements that make the western world, as opposed to the world generally, likely to decline dramatically over the next 150 years. but i think it's neither inevitable nor desirable (unlike many greens and guardian writers)

most of all i find it fascinating because no previous declining superpower has possessed the nuclear weaponry which can prevent their displacement. we're in uncharted waters.

[Colr]

Originally Posted by egb_hibs

are you perhaps overlooking the fact that i've said i don't expect it to happen?

You do bring the subject up a lot.

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by Colr

You do bring the subject up a lot.

these are the topics of our times. until around a year or so ago i was actually - if you remember - extremely bullish about the glories of capitalism and liberalism. we've never had it so good was my riff. i still believe that, but i am less optimistic that we can outrun the downsides.

[O'Driscoll]

I don't think we'll see the end of capitalism in my lifetime. Capitalism, with a more totalitarian form of government seems to be on the ascendancy i.e. China. These Guardian type debates rarely look at the fact that the west does not equal the world.

I would love to see a form of socialism rule the world, but its not going to happen!

re your point on aggressive nationalism, I doubt it will really feature as there is greater international movement of people than ever and you would have enemies within in every country in great numbers.

[Colr]

Originally Posted by egb_hibs

these are the topics of our times. until around a year or so ago i was actually - if you remember - extremely bullish about the glories of capitalism and liberalism. we've never had it so good was my riff. i still believe that, but i am less optimistic that we can outrun the downsides.

I'll make sure I point it out when your being apocalyptic.

You haven't been drinking vodka at all?

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by O'Driscoll

I don't think we'll see the end of capitalism in my lifetime. Capitalism, with a more totalitarian form of government seems to be on the ascendancy i.e. China. These Guardian type debates rarely look at the fact that the west does not equal the world.

i think china is the blueprint for the next phase of societal . it's an extremely effective model from a darwinistic pov if it proves sustainable.

the achilles heel may well be their policy of limiting children. they have an aging population issue which could stall them

I would love to see a form of socialism rule the world, but its not going to happen!

re your point on aggressive nationalism, I doubt it will really feature as there is greater international movement of people than ever and you would have enemies within in every country in great numbers.

that's precisely why i think it will happen.

on both the left and right there is growing discontent at globalisation; to have it on both sides is significant i think.

the societies which are on the up are those with strong ethnic identity, and thus strong social cohesion. that consensual collectivism married to market economics looks like a lethally effective cocktail to me - eliminating the corrosive effective of hyper-individualism which chips away at trad liberal capitalism, while harnessing the progressive dynamism of a market economy. it looks a fucking wicked formula to me, and this won't be lost on people if our own societies unravel.

[O'Driscoll]

Up till now the most dynamic societies have been those with a multi ethnic community and the societies left behind have been the ones where nationalism is strong (Serbia, Rwanda, Georgia...) China, for all its cohesion and market driven economy is not as such nationalistic, it seems to be quietly getting stronger and more influential all the time.

One worrying nation that does fit into the scenario you paint is Russia with its combined Stalinist hard man appraoch and its ruthless policies on natural resources. There is a nationalist powderkeg, whereby they are not constrained by the economic humiliation of soviet times, and have rejected the rampant free market of the Yeltsin era, they are flexing their muscles and could have a massive influence in the near future.

OOOooops I think i just defeated my own anti nationalist argument.

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by O'Driscoll

Up till now the most dynamic societies have been those with a multi ethnic community and the societies left behind have been the ones where nationalism is strong (Serbia, Rwanda, Georgia...)

yes, indeed. because that's been the traditional liberal capitalist model. but china and india have a new synthesis

China, for all its cohesion and market driven economy is not as such nationalistic, it seems to be quietly getting stronger and more influential all the time.

can't agree that china is not nationalistic! l think it is very nationalistic

One worrying nation that does fit into the scenario you paint is Russia with its combined Stalinist hard man appraoch and its ruthless policies on natural resources. There is a nationalist powderkeg, whereby they are not constrained by the economic humiliation of soviet times, and have rejected the rampant free market of the Yeltsin era, they are flexing their muscles and could have a massive influence in the near future.

OOOooops I think i just defeated my own anti nationalist argument.

. russia is a dying country. it's finished. but it could be very dangerous on the way down. it's not the future though.

[O'Driscoll]

Until we end our dependency on oil and get rid of nuclear weapons globally, Russia will always be an important nation. My fear over Russia is that the current nationalist fervent could lead the country to fascism.

Ironically enough the bit about Russia that we criticised during the cold war (lack of free speech, surveilance society) the west has taken lock stock and barrell.