"The Worldwide Crisis of Capitalism and the Relevance of Socialism"

The article with the above title (by prez candidate Jeff Mackler) is based on a resolution adopted by Socialist Action's (SA) 2018 convention. The provenance isn't very clear. It claims to be the introduction to a soon-to-be issued pamphlet of the same name (which I will definitely read). There are some introductory remarks by SA's editor (or Mr. Mackler?), followed by more introductory remarks by Mr. Mackler (or is that actually in the pamphet?). Then much of the article is in quotation marks (but not all of it), apparently quoting from some other joint statement or something.

So I'm going to ignore all italics and quotation marks and just treat it as a single piece all written by Mr. Mackler.

My Trotskyist friends understand nothing about economics, as demonstrated by the lede substantive paragraph.

Global capitalist competition, including the current trade wars, is a completely unavoidable aspect of the system of private profit. Competition results in new innovation/automation that increases the rate of profit for the initial innovator. But these gains are offset again by the rapid adoption of ever more advanced technology by competitors, and profit rates continue to fall.

Taken literally, they're true Luddites, seemingly opposed to any "innovation/automation." Apparently we should get rid of backhoes so that real men can dig ditches the way they used to--with a pick and shovel. But who needs those tools? Why not just use human hands, like a chimpanzee?

They claim capitalism has a "falling rate of profit," but fail to mention that it stems from lower prices. That is, consumers are better off and everybody has a higher standard of living. Our problem today is not too much "innovation/automation", but rather too little. Productivity growth (i.e., new technology) is only about 1%.

In their desperate struggle to fight the falling rate of profit capitalists try to reduce costs and increase their competitive edge by attacking trade unions and workers’ rights, by attacking wage and benefit levels, by attacking general social benefits such as education, health care, and pensions, by refusing to accept responsibility for the massive environmental damage caused by cutthroat capitalist competition, and by transferring production to low-wage, unregulated areas both within and outside their own countries…

This makes no sense. Until recently profits have been at record highs--there is no evidence of the long-term, secular decline that Trotskyists predict. While one can complain that wages are not growing as fast as one would like, there is no secular decline there, either. This chart shows that real wages have been increasing most months since 2009. There certainly has been no decline in spending on education and healthcare! Both those industries are growing faster than the economy. Social Security is still solvent (just barely). Only pensions have suffered, specifically because public employees have been promised benefits that were never realistic to begin with.

It is worth noting that apart from casual references as in the above quote, the document makes no mention of the "environment." Yet SA is on record as subscribing to catastrophic climate change, in which case long-term problems such as pensions are irrelevant. We'll all be dead by then. Yet somehow (at least in this document) the imminent end of the world has been put on indefinite hold.

SA obviously doesn't believe its own climate bullshit. But I will point out that making stuff cheaper with more "innovation/automation" is good for the environment. After all, cheaper means using fewer natural resources, less labor, less electricity, lower shipping costs, etc. SA needs to let us know how all of that hurts the environment.

With this background, the article then takes on several issues.

Russia & China: We're promised another pamphlet (by John Leslie) entitled China: A New Imperialist Power. I'll read that one, too, though maybe I shouldn't bother. SA's position on China is very similar to that articulately expressed by Lynn Henderson (here), and rebutted by me (here). No need to rehash it.

Teacher's Strikes: My Trotskyist friends are in love with last year's teachers' strikes, beginning with the one in West Virginia. Hate to break the news, but they're yesterday's news and will have no lasting impact on our politics. Nobody in the presidential campaign, for example, is discussing them at all.

I commented on the strikes in West Virginia and Kentucky here and here. The West Virginia strike was successful, but only on a narrow wage dispute. It hardly augers a new age. The Kentucky strike was a hail-Mary pass in an effort save an irreversibly bankrupt pension plan. The strike accomplished nothing. I have not followed the other strikes closely, but I believe the California strike was also about pensions, i.e., futile howling at the moon.

Mr. Mackler goes on to claim that the teachers' biggest problem is their alliance with the Democratic Party. Really? The Democrats actually control purse strings, unlike the losers over at SA. If you're trying to save your (hopeless) pension plan, working with the Dems is the best option. Real teachers need real money, not just a bunch of gobbledygook sloganeering from the likes of Jeff Mackler.

Tax the Rich: That's Mr. Mackler's solution to all problems. The richest man in West Virginia is the governor, Jim Justice. He's worth $1.6 billion, and owns coal mines (that look to be near bankrupt), hotels and golf courses. If you assume a 10% rate of return on his wealth (very optimistic), then his annual income is $160 million. By comparison, West Virginia's total annual income--the state GDP--was $74 billion in 2018. Jim Justice's income is 0.2% of the state's total--hardly enough to solve all the problems in the universe as Mr. Mackler proposes.

Socialism: Mr. Mackler disses the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

Though they call themselves “democratic socialists”—falsely implying that other socialists oppose democracy—we prefer the traditional label, “social democrats,” which makes clear that the DSA and similar organizations are Democratic Party supporters first and foremost, who pretend that socialism—a fundamental break with capitalist exploitation and rule—can be won through electoral reforms and other incremental changes to the capitalist system.

The irony is that SA does oppose democracy--they call all elections phony unless they win them (which they never do). So the DSA's distinction is apt.

Foreign Affairs: SA doubles down on its support for the world's worst dictators: Kim Jong Un and Bashar al-Assad. Yes, they hide behind the fig leaf of only demanding US "non-intervention," but that's not much of a hiding place. In reality they support brutal, totalitarian regimes.

They discuss the "pink revolutions" in Latin America. Apparently--in Mr. Mackler's opinion--Venezuela didn't go full Venezuela enough. In addition to merely destroying the country, they should have nationalized it as well. That'll teach them evil imperialists! Of course SA touts Cuba as a successful example of socialism--a country that's much poorer than the Philippines, can't feed itself, and survives only because it's a police state.

I'm not sure what on this list makes for a viable election campaign. The only superficially attractive slogan is Tax the Rich, but that falls apart on even cursory examination. Nothing else here will have any popular appeal whatsoever.

So SA is publishing two new pamphlets. Here's how you order them.

Below is a partial list of pamphlets published by Socialist Action Books. To order send a letter with a list of the pamphlets you would like to purchase to P.O. Box 10328, Oakland CA 94610, along with a check made out to “Socialist Action Books.” Please add $2 for postage to any order of pamphlets, along with the listed price.

So far, at least a few pamphlets are available for free download; the rest are priced to simply cover printing costs.

That's pretty old-fashioned. My millennial children, for example, don't use either postage stamps or paper checks. I don't even use paper checks anymore, and maybe I'll send a snail-mail letter once every six months or so.

I hope the new pamphlets will be available for download. Yes, I would be willing to go to the bank, pay for a cashier's check, write it out and send it snail mail to the address above. But I doubt it would work. SA has never responded to anything I send them, so I think they'd probably pocket the money and not send me the pamphlet. That's just the way they roll.

Oh well.

Further Reading:

• Heather Bradford on Abortion
• Boring Jeff Mackler Runs for President Again
• The Philippines