Tory Death Spiral
- Thread starter Kaka Tim
- Start date
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I think that's for the whole lot of them!
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
They really don't seem to care about being seen to hold the proles in contempt, do they?
not a trot
Well-Known Member
But the proles keep voting for them because they like the messages being given.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I know. It's really hard not to hold the proles in contempt
mauvais
on reddit or something
Had this argument today. I don't think so. I think it's because they've been repeatedly told that this is the best available option and that change is dangerous, e.g. that we cannot afford public spending. That's not a thing that you like, it's a thing that you accept.
At least you'd better hope it's that, because the alternative is really bad.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
Yeah, I think you're right. People are being stampeded off the cliff by a big scary monster called "SPENDING".
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
In the land of the economically illiterate the one-eyed notion of household economics is king.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
Surely, economic "literacy" is the problem.
Proper Tidy
Arsed
If only 'proles' had the vote then the tory party wouldn't exist let alone ever get into government
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
It's not economic illiteracy that is a problem, it is economics itself.
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
Ignorance as bliss?
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
Same with gravity.
Proper Tidy
Arsed
Capital: a critique of never mind
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
Yep; a critique equipping the proletariat with the economic literacy to emancipate themselves.
Proper Tidy
Arsed
Yeah fair, although also a critique of political economy, or economics. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence but their social existence that determines their consciousness and all that
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
Yeah, also fair.
That said, it seems fairly self-evident that small-state fundamentalists exploit (macro)economic illiteracy to condition the electorate to accept understandable 'household' economics as a means to electoral consent for their consolidator state.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
What PT said. A critique of political economy/economics.
How does a "better" economic literacy help when the purpose of economics (all economics) is to maintain and extend the exploitation of workers?
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
You're happy for workers to rely on 'household'/balancing of the books/'only spending what we can afford' perspectives of macro-economics?
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
Of course not, but the key is to make a political challenge to such a view not an economic challenge. Economics is the problem, all economics, we cannot use an "improved" economic literacy to escape from economics
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
Your first 3 words suggest we don’t really disagree that economic illiteracy is a barrier to political challenge.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
I think the disagreement is a subtle but crucial one.
The purpose of Keynesianism was not to reduce the exploitation of workers but to increase it, to make that exploitation more effective. As I've said the purpose of economics is to maintain and increase it the exploitation of labour, so the escape route of labour from that exploitation cannot be via greater economic "literacy".
In fact a defence of economic literacy merely strengthens capital, it makes economics an important branch of knowledge (And note you are not even taking about political economy but economics).
Who are the most economic literate? Well we better make sure they have the handling of the economy rather than politicians.
Why should we do X rather than Y? Because it is better economically, i.e. better for capital.
The defence of the EU was built on an economic defence, spearheaded by the economically literate BoE or OBR - whatever your views on the end result the rejection of the experts by so many is something to cheer not criticise. At a point when so many workers, rightly, hold economics and economists in such disregard why do we want to restore confidence in the tool of capital?
The purpose of Keynesianism was not to reduce the exploitation of workers but to increase it, to make that exploitation more effective. As I've said the purpose of economics is to maintain and increase it the exploitation of labour, so the escape route of labour from that exploitation cannot be via greater economic "literacy".
In fact a defence of economic literacy merely strengthens capital, it makes economics an important branch of knowledge (And note you are not even taking about political economy but economics).
Who are the most economic literate? Well we better make sure they have the handling of the economy rather than politicians.
Why should we do X rather than Y? Because it is better economically, i.e. better for capital.
The defence of the EU was built on an economic defence, spearheaded by the economically literate BoE or OBR - whatever your views on the end result the rejection of the experts by so many is something to cheer not criticise. At a point when so many workers, rightly, hold economics and economists in such disregard why do we want to restore confidence in the tool of capital?
Proper Tidy
Arsed
And how would it be resolved - by making economics mandatory at GCSE? Immerse kids in the logic of capital (and inoculate against thinking differently, thinking socially), like economics, business etc already does, but by compulsion
ruffneck23
front left
That was just down the road from me, I wish I knew it was on , I would have been far,far, less polite than the lady.
Last edited:
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
That's well argued and this exchange of views has caused me to think very carefully about my call for greater economic literacy. (thinking this might make an interesting thread...if there isn't already one on economics!).
On reflection, I think we will ultimately disagree about this one. I still think that greater economic literacy would empower working people immiserated and impoverished by neoliberal, consolidator states to recognise, understand and collectively respond to those exploiting the electorate's macro-economic ignorance to establish consent for their class-war/small-state policies.
Establishing greater economic literacy does not pre-suppose any instrumental purpose of creating more 'economists' or manufacturing consent for any particular macro-economic school, but could empower people to challenge the (economic) false consciousness of parties promoting neoliberal objectives on the basis of 'common sense' 'household economics'. The challenge to regressive macro-economics often appears counter-intuitive without a basic economic understanding.
I recognise that this position is always in danger of appearing variously patronising, naive and un-realistic and that there are many valid questions about how knowledge and skills necessary might be inculcated...but...given all that...the alternative seems to be a contentment of ignorance. I've always generally thought that the more you can understand of your (class) enemy's weapons, tactics and strategy, the better the chance of fighting back.
Similar threads
