On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 7:43 AM, Louis Proyect <[email protected]> wrote:

> I am proud to be called a Trot, even if I am more of a Bukharinite. But
> Yves Smith? This is just a stupid smear, like Sean Hannity calling Obama
> a "socialist".
>


I couldn't care less what Marxist faction, Proyect associates himself with,
but he happens to be exactly right about Yves Smith.

I used to read her work a lot back in the housing bubble years when she
(along with the late Tanta of the CalculatedRisk blog) had some of the best
economic and financial commentary equipped with excellent and detailed
inside knowledge, keen intelligence and terrific writing skills.

She has since the crisis years become quite radicalized and her blog has
grown into an aggregation site - sort of a radical version of the
Huffington Post. Although she has excellent contributors (including Michael
Perelman, William Black and I believe Yanis Varoufakis before this year),
the volume of material has become too large for me to keep up like I used
to. Now I just scan the RSS feed from her site for the occasional essay
that seems especially interesting.

Anyway I was and still remain a fan of Yves Smith's work.

She definitely belongs to the radical left, offers shrill commentary on
neoliberalism and Wall St, and frequently uses Marxist categories in her
analysis.

BUT - she is no Marxist - much less a "Trot" whatever that means. For a
reasonably typical example of the role that Marxist ideology plays in her
analysis see this (yes, I know this is a guest contributor rather than Yves
herself, but I recall her writing similar things in the past):
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/10/marx-versus-capitalism-versus-you.html
--------------------------snip

This is basically what is wrong in the developed world. There needs to be a
balance between wages and investment returns for the system to function
well. Henry Ford paid his workers well not because he was a generous man,
but because then they could buy Fords. Globalisation has, of course, undone
this compact, and although it has led to some productivity improvements, it
is also having the effect of gutting the middle classes in the developed
world. In Europe it is seen in the shape of unemployment, in America, the
same as well as in the shape of rising poverty
<http://www.abc.net.au/rn/saturdayextra/stories/2011/3344486.htm> and the
evaporation of the middle class.

Now, one does not have to be a Marxist to arrive at these conclusions. But
Marxism (as opposed to what Marx wrote) resulted in the demonisation of
markets, a perfectly normal human activity that goes back 3,000 years, give
or take a century. In response, capitalism (whatever that is exactly) felt
the need to overstate the value of markets, producing the kind of market
worship we now see. Each position is absurd. Marxism has largely collapsed
from its own contradictions. Capitalism is on the way to doing the same
because when market worship is applied to financial systems, it produces
the kind of endless regresses we are now seeing.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to