Overview:

Capitalism has been a totalizing---I am tempted to write totalitariansystem, in a way in which no previous mode of production had been,

compelling the whole world to dance to its frenzied rhythms of competition and accumulation. As it has done so, the system as a whole has continually reacted back upon the individual processes on which

. It forces each capital to force down the price of labour power to the minimum that will keep its workers able and willing to work. The clash for capitals compels each to accumulate in a way that will
system that
creates periodic havoc for all those who live within it, a horrific hybrid of Frankensteins monster and of
Dracula, a human creation that has escaped control and lives by devouring the lifeblood of its
creators.
it depends

produce downward pressure on profit rates for all of them. It stops any of them standing still, even if they occasionally become aware of the devastation they are causing. It is a

Link: Economic growth and reform

The status quo of economics bases itself in a state of equilibrium, presuming
that the capitalist world is perfect and dandy and that crisis will never occur.
Modern neoclassical economics seek to mask its imperfections by
attempting to reform the system, only serving as a veneer over the horrors
that lie underneath.
1 Chris Harman 2009 Zombie Capitalism, pg. 9
The mainstream economics that is taught in schools and universities has proved
completely unable to come to terms with [economic crises]. The bank of
International Settlements recognizes that Virtually no one foresaw the Great
Depressioneach downturn was preceded by a period of non-inflationary growth
exuberant enough to lead many commentators to suggest that a new era had
arrived Nothing sums up the incomprehension of those who defend capitalism as
much as their inability to explain the most significant episode in the 20th century
the slump of the 1930s. Ben Bernanke, the present head of the Federal Reserve and
supposedly one of mainstream economics most respected experts on economic crises,
admits that understanding the Great Depression is the Holy Grail of macroeconomics in
other words he can find no explanation for itThese are not accidental failings. They
are built into the very assumptions of the neoclassical or marginalist school that
has dominated mainstream economics for a century and a quarter. Its founders set
themselves the task of showing how markets clearthat is, how all the goods in
them will find buyers. But that assumes in advance that crises are not possible. The
implausibility of the neoclassical model in the face of some of the most obvious features
of capitalism has led to recurrent attempts within the mainstream to bolt extra
elements onto it in an ad hoc way. None of these additions, however, alter the basic
belief that the system will return to equilibrium---providing prices, and especially
wages, adjust to market pressures without hindrance. Even Keynes, who went further
than anyone else in the mainstream in questioning the equilibrium model, still assumed it
could be made to work with a degree of government intervention. Yet what is
involved is not just abstract academic scholasticism. The orthodoxy is an ideological
product in the sense that it operates from the standpoint of those who profit from
the market system. It presents their profiteering as the supreme way of contributing
to the common good, while absolving them of anything that goes wrong. And it rules
out any fundamental critique of the present system, in a way that suits those with

commanding positions in educational structures, connected as they are to all other

structures of capitalism.
Status quo:
Minorswerenotconsideredlegallycapableofmakingmedicaldecisionsandwereviewedasincompetent
becauseoftheirage.Theauthoritytoconsentorrefusetreatmentforaminorremainedwithaparentor
guardian.Thisparentalauthoritywasderivedfromtheconstitutionalrighttoprivacyregardingfamily
matters,commonlawrule,andageneralpresumptionthatparentsorguardianswillactinthebestinterest
oftheirincompetentchild.Seemoreat:http://www.nursingcenter.com/lnc/cearticle?
tid=739795#sthash.XTftLSyG.dpuf

Link: Medicine
Capitalismhasturnedpatientsthemselvesintocommoditiesforsalebytheirphysiciansofferinga
sourceofprofitnotjustthroughdrugsbutthroughexpensivehitechtestingandtreatment
technologies.Allthisatmassiveexpensetonationalhealthservicesand/ortotheprofitofprivate
healthprovidersmilkinghealthinsurancecompanies.
Thetruthisthatillnessisessentiallybigbusiness,thatBigPharmaisBigBucksandBadMedicine,
andthattodaysevidencebasedmedicineisessentiallyMoneyDrivenMedicine.Indeedanydrugor
newmedicaltechnologythatactuallycuredadiseasewouldbefatalfortheprofitsoftheentire
MedicalIndustrialComplex.Neverthelessthepromiseofcureisconstantlypromotedbythismulti
trilliondollarmedicalindustryonewithvastlobbyingpowerandalmostcompletemonetary
controlofregulatoryorganisationssuchastheFoodandDrugAdministrationintheU.S.A.

Link:
Anydiscussionofteenagersandcapitalismneedstobeginwiththesetwomajorthemes
individualismandpersonalrights.Todaysteenagersexpressthisbytheirveryexistence.Theyare
selffocused.Thisisanormaldevelopmentalstage.Itisalsoanormalstageinthelifecyclewhere
personalconsumptionnowtrumpsinvestmentanddeferredconsumption.4Inadditiontothenormal
development,wenowteachchildrenfrombirththattheyareimportant,soimportantinfactthat
eachonehasbeennurturedandcelebrated,notastheyconnectwiththeirfamilies,theircommunity
orlargersocietybutforwhotheyareindividually.Thereareofcourseexceptionstoeveryrule,butwith
emergingadulthoodnowcommonlyacceptedasadevelopmentalstage,thecommunalscenehasshifted. 5
Individualrightsareaprecursortoprivateownership.Initially,propertywasownedbyindividuals
orindividualfamilies.Thisestablishedwealth,statusandpower. 6Todaywealth,statusandpower
arestillbeingdisplayed.Teenagersmaynotownahousebuttheycertainlyspendmoneytoestablish
theirimagethroughownershipofgoods.Whatyouownestablishesyourstatusregardlessofhow
muchdebtyouaccumulatetocreateyourimage.Statuscarrieswithitanimplicationofwealth,
whetheritistrueornot.

Thelegacyofcapitalismpassedtoadolescentstodayisasenseofentitlementandapreoccupation
withimage.Iwouldsayforanyone,butforteenagersinparticular,capitalismismoreabouta
lifestylethaneconomics.Thisplaysouteverydayinmillionsofchoicesmadebyagroupofpeople
wieldingover$155billionindisposablediscretionaryspendingeachyearsince2000withnoslowingin
sight.7Infactregardlessofoveralleconomictrends,teenspending(ages1219)hascontinuedtogrowby
5%forthepast7years.By2006theestimationisforadolescentspendingtotop$190billion.8
Victimorsavvyparticipant?Manipulatedorsettingthetrends?Teenagersareanythingbutignoredin
thiscapitalisticsociety.Theyarethefocusofattentionwithbillionsofdollarsandthousandsof
adultsattemptingtocapturetheirnextmove.Theyareliterallytellingthemarketingindustrywhat
theywant,whattheydemand.JamesTwitchell,aprofessorofEnglishandadvertisingsaysitthisway,
Wewerenotsuddenlytransformedfromcustomerstoconsumersbywilymanufacturerseagertounloada
surplusofcrapularproducts.Wemaybemanythingsbutwhatwearenotarevictimsofcapitalism.18He
seescapitalismandconsumptionasaliberatingrole.Herefusestoseeconsumersaspassiveandhelpless
actuallywantingtogivecreditbacktopeoplefordemandingnotonlybetterproductsbutbetterinformation
surroundingthoseproducts.19Teenagersarefickle.Manyproductsandbusinessesburnbrightandaregone
insixmonths.Songsthateveryteenagerseemstoknowareforgottenandneverconsideredagainassoon
asthenextbighitcomesalong.Privateindustryandmarketerslooktoteenagersandifateenagersays
jump,theyaskhowhigh?Buzzmarketingmayhelpbutitwillneverequalthatoftheteenagepreference.

Giving teenagers autonomous medical decision making power

effectively opens up an entirely new industry to perpetuate capitalism
with; A new audience to help corrupt under the capitalist regime.

Impact: Commodity fetishism and

exploitation
Harman 4
Social labour.Valueonly comes to light as a result of the continual blind, blind,
interaction of commodities on the market. The system as a whole forces its
individual components to worry about how the individual labour they employ
relates to labour elsewhere. [This is] the process known as the operation of the law
of value. Once commodity production is generalized across a society, one particular
good comes to be used to resent the value of all others---moneyThe development of
commodity production had one important effect. It systematically distort[s] peoples
understanding of reality through what Marx called the fetishism of commodities

Harman 5
Therelation of the producers to the sum total of their own labour is presented to
them as social relations, existing not between themselves, but between the products
of their labourA definite social relation between men assumes, in their eyes, the
fantastic form of a relation between things. In order to find an analogy, we must have
recourse to the mist enveloped regions of the religious world. In that world the
productions of the human brain appear as independent beings endowed with life, and
entering into relation both with one another and the human race. So it is in the world of
commodities with the products of mens hands.
People speak of the power of money, as if its power didnt come from human
labour for which it is a token; or of the needs of the market as if the market was
anything more than an arrangement for linking together the concrete acts of labour
of different human beings. Such mystical attitudes lead people to ascribe social ills
to things beyond human controlthe process which the young Marx had called
alienation and which some Marxists since Marx have called reification. But without
seeing through the fetishism, the conscious action to transform society cannot take
place.
The worker can leave the individual capitalist to whom he hires himself whenever he
liesBut the worker, whose sole source of livelihood is the sale of his labour, cannot
leave the whole class of purchasers, that is the capitalist class, without renouncing
his existence. He belongs not to this or that bourgeois, but to the bourgeois class.
The [commodity fetishism] now takes the form of making it seem that creativity
doesnt lie with living human beings, but the products of their labour, so that people
talk of capital creating wealth and employer providing people with work, whereas in

reality it is labour that adds to the value of capital and the worker who provides labour to
the employer.

Compulsive accumulation
7 Chris Harman 2009 Zombie Capitalism pg. 36
However successful a firm may have been in the past, it lives in fear of a rival firm
investing profits in newer and more modern plant and machinery. No capitalist dare
stand still for any length of time, for that would mean falling behind the competitors.
And to fall behind is to eventually to go bust. It is this which explains the dynamism
of capitalism. The pressure on each capitalist to keep ahead of every other leads to the
continual upgrading of plant and machinery.
So it is that capitalism becomes not merely a system of exploiting free wage
workers, but also a system of compulsive accumulation.
Capital is not then defined just by exploitation, but by its necessary drive to selfexpansion. The motivation for production and exchange is increasing the amount of
value in the hands of the capitalist firma process for which some Marxist writers use
the neologism valorization. So the system is not just a system of commodity
productive, it is also a system of competitive accumulation. This creates limits to the
action possible not only for worker, but also for capitalists. For if they do not
continually seek to exploit their workers as much as is practically possible, they will
not dispose of the surplus value necessary to accumulate as quickly as their rivals.
They can choose to exploit their workers in one way rather than another. But they
cannot choose not to exploit their workers at all, or even to exploit them less than
other capitalists do--- unless they want to bust. They themselves are subject to a
system which pursues its relentless course whatever the feelings of individual human
beings.

Impact: Crisis
The possibility of general crises of overproduction was built into the very nature of
capitalism. He destroyed the arguments based upon Says law in a couple of paragraphs
in the first volume of Capital. Of course, he acknowledged, every time someone sells an
article someone else buys it. But, argued Marx, once money is used to exchange goods
through the market, it does not follow that the seller has then immediately to buy

something else. Money acts not only as a measure of value in directly exchanging
goods, but also as a means of storing value. If someone chooses to save they money
the from selling a good rather than spending it immediately, then there will not be
enough money being spent in the system as a whole to buy all the goods that have
been produced:
Nothing can be more childish than the dogma that because every sale is a
purchase and every purchase a sale, therefore the circulation of commodities
necessary implies equilibirum of sales and purchases. If this means that the number
of actual sales is equal to the number of purchases, it is mere tautology. But its real
purport is to prove that every seller brings his buyer to market with him. Nothing of
the kind. The sale and the purchase constitutean exchange between a commodityowner and an owner of money, between two persons as opposed to each other as the
two poles of a magnet
No one can sell unless some one else purchases. But no one is forthwith bound to
purchase, because he has just sold. Circulation bursts through all restrictions as to
time place, and individuals, imposed by direct barter, and this it effects by splitting
up, into the antithesis of a sale and a purchase, the direct identity that in barter does
exist between the alienation of ones own and the acquisition of some other mans
product. If the interval in time between the two complementary phases of the
complete metamorphosis beof a commodity become too great, if the split between
the sale and the purchase become too pronounced, the intimate connexion between
them, their oneness, asserts itself by producinga crisis.

Impact: Imperialism and War

Chris Harman Zombie Capitalsm 2009 pg. 90
Hilferding did not see competition as disappearing completely. He
emphasized the importance of international competition, pointing to the way the

merger of finance and industry inside a country led to pressure on its state to use
protectionist tax duties to aid its capitalists in their struggle against rivals in the
world market. It is not free trade England, but the protectionist countries, Germany and
the United States, which become the models of capitalist development, wrote Hilferding.
Far from continuing with the traditional liberal notion of a minimal nightwatchman state the great trusts wanted it to have the power to widen its
boundaries so as to enlarge the market in which they could gain monopoly profits:
While free trade was indifferent to colonies, protectionism leads directly to a more
active colonial policy, and to conflicts of interests between different states,
Hilferding argued. The policy of finance capital is bound to lead towards war.

Open up the space of a revolutionary subjectivity. Embrace the revolution in favor

of socialism.
Zizek Professor of Philosophy 2004 [Slavoj, Revolution at the Gates, Zizek on
Lenin The 1917 Writings, p.259-260]
As Deleuze saw very clearly, we cannot provide in advance an
unambiguous criterion which will allow us to distinguish "false"
violent outburst from the "miracle" of the authentic
revolutionary breakthrough. The ambiguity is irreducible here,
since the "miracle" can occur only through the repetition of
previous failures. And this is also why violence is a necessary
ingredient of a revolutionary political act. That is to say: what is the
criterion of a political act proper? Success as such clearly does
not count, even if we define it in the dialectical terms of
Merleau-Ponty: as the wager that the future will retroactively
redeem our present horrible acts (this is how Merleau-Ponty, in
Humanism and Terror, provided one of the more intelligent
justifications of the Stalinist terror: retroactively, it will become justified
if its final outcome is true freedom);129 neither does reference to
some abstract-universal ethical norm. The only criterion is the
absolutely inherent one: that of the enacted utopia. In a
genuine revolutionary breakthrough, the utopian future is
neither simply fully realized, present, nor simply evoked as a
distant rpromise which justifies present violence it is rather
as if in a unique suspension of temporality, in the short circuit
between the present and the future, we are as if by Grace
briefly allowed to act as if the utopian future is (not yet fully
here, but) already at hand, there to be seized. Revolution is
experienced not as a present hardship we have to endure for
the sake of the happiness and freedom of future generations,
but as the present hardship over which this future happiness
and freedom already cast their shadow in it, we are already free

even as we fight for freedom; we are already happy even as we fight

for happiness, no matter how difficult the circumstances. Revolution
is not a Merleau-Pontyan wager, an act suspended in the futur
anterieur, to be legitimized or de-legitimized by the long-term
outcome of present acts; it is, as it were, its own ontological
proof, an immediate index of its own truth.

Traditional discourse gives capitalism a free pass. This is an

independent reason to vote for the negative we start
necessary conversations that wouldnt happen
without us.
Wolff,
an American
economist, well known for his work on Marxian economics, economic methodology, and class analysis,

11

(Richard, 10/4, Occupy Wall

Street ends capitalism's alibi,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/oct/04/occupy-wall-street-new-york ) CW
We all know that moving in this direction will elicit the screams of "socialism" from the usual predictable corners. The tired rhetoric lives on long after the cold war that orchestrated it fades out of memory. The

.
It is long overdue in the US for us to have a genuine conversation and struggle over
our current economic system. Capitalism has gotten a free pass for far too long. We
take pride in questioning, challenging, criticizing and debating our health,
education, military, transportation and other basic social institutions. We argue
whether their current structures and functioning serve our needs. We work our way
to changing them so they perform better. And so it should be. Yet, for decades now,
we have failed to similarly question, challenge, criticize and debate our economic
system: capitalism. Because a taboo protected capitalism, cheerleading and
celebrating it became obligatory. Criticism and questions got banished as heresy,
disloyalty or worse. Behind the protective taboo, capitalism degenerated into the
ineffective, unequal, crisis ridden social disaster we all now bear. Capitalism is the
problem and the joblessness, homelessness, insecurity, and austerity it now imposes
everywhere are the costs we bear. We have the people, the skills and the tools to
produce the goods and services needed for a just society to prosper. We just need to
reorganize our producing units differently, to go beyond a capitalist economic
system that no longer serves our needs. Humanity learned to do without kings and
emperors and slave masters. We found our way to a democratic alternative, however partial and unfinished the democratic project remains. We can now take the next step
audience for that rhetoric is fast fading, too

to realize that democratic project. We can bring democracy to our enterprisesby transforming them into cooperatives owned, operated and governed by democratic assemblies composed of all who work in them and

Let me conclude by offering a slogan:

"The US can do better than corporate capitalism." Let that be an idea and a debate
that this renewed movement can engage. Doing so would give an immense gift to the US
all the residents of the communities who are interdependent with them.

and the world. It would break through the taboo, finally subjecting capitalism to the
critiques and debates it as evaded for far too long and at far too great a cost to all.

Bruce R. Scott The Political Economy of Capitalism

Allorganizedsportscanbeunderstoodasthreelevelsystems,assuggestedinFigure2.2.Thefirst
levelisthegameitself,inwhichathletescompetewithoneanother,whetherasindividualsorasteams.
Thiscompetitionisusuallythefocusofaudienceattention;weareconcernedtosee
whowinsorlosesaswellashowthegameisplayed.However,organizedsports
typicallyarenotplayedinbackalleysoroutinthetallweeds,noratrandomtimes
amongrandomassortmentsofathletes.Rather,theactualcompetitionusuallyunfoldsin
carefullymarkedoutareas,atspecifictimes,underthesupervisionofasetof
referees.Theuseofanexplicitsettingandsetofrulesforsportsparallelcapitalismsnascentbeginningsinthelatemiddleages,whenitwasconfinedtospecificallydesignatedmarketlocationsand
marketdaysandwasoftencarriedoutaccordingtoaprescribedsetofrules,oftenunderthedirectsupervisionofdulycharteredguildsofregistered
tradesmen.

Theinfrastructurethatguidesthefirstlevelgame,then,iscreatedandmaintained
bytheadministrativeandregulatoryofficialswhocomprisethesecondlevel.More
specifically,theseagentsdemarcatethefield,specifyrulesofplayandthescoring
system,andmonitortheplay.Theseagentsorganizeandlegitimatethecompetition
andensurethatitiscarriedoutonalevelplayingfield,withnounfairadvantages
permitted.
Capitalisminvolvesaverycomplexsetofrelationships,wheremanyactorshavepower,andeachhasthecapacitytoinfluencehowthesystemworks.Atthesametimeitisfundamentallydifferentfromany
mechanicalsysteminthatitscomponentshaveregenerativepowersandtheirrelationshipscontinuetoevolvethroughtime.Thus,itismoreusefullyseenasasystemthatisorganicorsocialthanonegovernedby
rigidlawslikephysics.Organizedsportsprovideausefulanalogytoacapitalisteconomy.Thecomparisoncanbehelpfulbecauseorganizedsportsaresmaller,simplersystemsandthereforemoreeasilyunderstood
astotalities.Organizedsportsalsoevolve,buttypicallyatamuchmoremeasuredpacethanthedynamicsectorsofacapitalisteconomy.Mostpeoplehaveobservedoneormoreorganizedsportsandarefamiliar
withcompetitioninaregulatedcontext.Thustheycandistinguishbetweenacontestwithrulesandrefereesandanunrefereedcontest,whichcandeteriorateintoafreeforall.Whilethereareimportantsimilarities
betweenorganizedsportsandcapitalism,weneedtobeawareofsomedifferencesaswell;thesedifferencesbetweencapitalismandorganizedsportswillallowustohighlightdistinctcharacteristicsoftheformer.

Inorganizedsportsasincapitalismathirdlevelisrequired
tocompletethesystem.Itiscomprisedofapoliticalauthoritywiththepowerto
decideontherules,i.e.,whoiseligibletocompete,thetimeandlocationofthegames,andtechnologiesthatmaybeused.
Advantages,suchasaplayingfieldtilitedinonesfavor,becomepossiblesourcesof
additionalandpotentiallycumulativeadvantages.Sincecapitalismisdesigned
topromoteproductivity,itcanbeexpectedtopromoteinequalitiesofincomeand
wealth,andfirstmoversinatechnologymaykeeptheiradvantagesfordecades.
Capitalistcompetitionisforkeeps.
Buthowdotheseinstitutionalfoundationsariseandachievelegitimacy

JohnBellamyFoster2011,TheGreatFinancialCrisis
ForBowlesandGintis,schoolingundercapitalismifnotcounteredbypowerfuldemocraticresistance
movementstendstoevolveinthedirectionofcapitalistclassimperatives,whichsubordinateitto
theneedsofproductionandaccumulation.Thisisevidentinwhattheauthorscalledthe
correspondenceprinciple,orthenotionthatthesocialrelationsofeducationnormallycorrespond
tothesocialrelationsofproductionincapitalistsociety.6Schooling,therefore,ismeanttoservice
production,andreplicatesthehierarchicaldivisionoflaboroftheproductivesystem.7Hence,both
thedominantpurposeofelementaryandsecondaryschoolingincapitalistsocietytheformationof

workersorlaborpowerforproductionandthelaborprocessinternaltoschoolingitself,ascarried
outbyeducationworkers,arefundamentallyconditionedbytherelationsofproductioninthelarger
economy.
Inthisview,theformsofconsciousnessandbehaviorfosteredbycapitalistschoolingaredesignedto
reproduceexistingclassesandgroupings,andthusaremeanttoreinforceandlegitimizethesocial
relationsofproductionofcapitalistsocietyasawhole.Workingclassstudentsandthosedestinedfor
workingclassoccupationsaretaughtrulefollowingbehavior,whilethosearisingfromtheupper
middleclassand/ordestinedfortheprofessionalmanagerialstratumaretaughttointernalizethe
valuesofthesociety.(Thosebetweenthesetwogroupsaremainlytrainedtobereliable,inaddition
tofollowingrules.)8

Theroleoftheballotistovoteforthebetterdebater,butfair
adjudicationcannotoccurbecauseCapitalismmodifiesour
understandingofwhatitmeanstobefairascapitalistorthodoxy
demarcateswhatisconsideredacceptableandrightingaming.Forus
tohaveatrueconceptionofwhatfairnessisrequiresustobreakdown
andachieveanunderstandingofcapitalism.TheKisprefiat.
Thus the role of the ballot is to vote for the team that best challenges capitalist orthodoxy.