namaan
Rookie
- Thread starter
- #81
We can broadly categorise western capitalism into 3 categories: social democratic, liberal democratic and Anglo-Saxon. The major difference refers to the methods used to maintain capitalism and to minimise problems such as stagflation. The first two focus more on controlling poverty levels, particularly when faced with labour militancy. The Anglo Saxon variety, however, replaces social expenditure mechanisms with the military sector. They're ironically closer to neo-Marxist thought, where the military sector becomes a key form of "waste" that is used to stabilise the economyAs far as I understand, since this was back when we were still talking about free-market regulations (no pun intended), Limey's argument here is that free-markets do require some form of regulation to counteract the human failings in a capitalism that is prone to crisis.
Well, that neo-Marxist thought, not that I've read much into it, sounds like it's straight out of 1984 thinking. Forgive me for my ignorance, but even though those categories are meant to be broad, these types of theories, I must admit, seem to me more suitable to a novel like 1984 than the nuances and color of real life. Though I did enjoy reading the novel
I mean, it just seems to me that the government is rarely so coordinated and deliberate in their action that their programs of action can be simplified to such an extent. After all, this is a democracy (though this is increasingly debatable with corporatists at play), not a dictatorship. You're not really going to find the entire economy being influence by a single train of thought.