From: "Nate Holdren" <nateholdren-AT-hotmail.com>
Subject: AUT: highest form of capitalism
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 15:21:09 -0500


>From: Jim Fleming <jim-AT-autonomedia.org>
I believe it was Michael who said something earlier about the highest form 
or stage of capitalism.
What do people think about this idea of a highest or most fully developed 
stage of capitalism? I know the Spartacists in Chicago like to show up at 
events and give short sermons about how the issue at hand (whatever it may 
be) is an example of imperialism which is the highest stage of capitalism 
which means socialism is almost here.
I don't know what to make of this idea, I don't think I understand it. how 
is capitalism in the 19th century a lower form of capitalism than say 
mid-twentieth century or early 21st century capitalism? what do we gain by 
categorizing capitalism in terms of higher or lower forms?
I can see how the idea is important that capitalism can be more or less 
prevalent in/across society or the world, in the sense of having more or 
less of society or the world controlled or reshaped by/for capital. What I 
don't like about the higher/lower model is I think it implies that only 
after the highest stages have been reached can revolution occur. Am I 
misunderstanding this or no?
thanks.
Nate




_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com



     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---