From: "jurriaan bendien" <Jbendien-AT-globalxs.nl>
Subject: Re: M-TH: The law and socialism
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 12:16:35 +0100


Boddhisatva writes:
> 
> 	Isn't a market, free of the distorting influences of capitalist
> hegemony, a democratic institution?  

No. This is a petit bourgeois illusion. The market has nothing to do with
democracy, the market is not democratic.  The historical evidence is that
the more the allocation of resources is left to market mechanisms, the more
social inequality is excascerbated.  As long as the market exists, there
will be opportunities for private enrichment at the expense of others or of
society.  State intervention and a high political awareness can keep this
within certain limits, but not eliminate the condition.

Can producers not implement social
> priorities?  

Are you being rhetorical ? Yes, of course, but everything depends on the
specific way this is done. 

Isn't one of the most important priorities to produce what
> people want?  

Some things that people produce are socially harmful, therefore ought not
to be produced from a socialist point of view, starting off with nuclear
weaponry.  The question is how "what people want" is socially expressed. 

Aren't consumers rational?  

The consumer is by and large self-interested, and insofar as s/he gears
his/her behaviour to satisfying self-interest this is "rational".  But
there are all sorts of "rationalities" possible.  Capitalism is very
"rational" in certain ways, "irrational" in others.

Can they not decide what they
> need and be cognizant of the side-effects of their demands? 

I believe so, if I didn't I would not be a socialist.
 
> 	What socialism is about, precisely, is worker control of the means
> of production.  

Yes but that is an abstract formula, rhetoric.  It has to be fleshed out
precisely what this means especially when the working class is the
overwhelming majority of the population.  The question is, HOW can people
control the means of production, what mechanisms and modes of organisation
are involved.

If you don't believe that workers can control the means of
> production and produce for a market simultaneously, then you should make
> that case. 

I do believe this, hence need not make the case.  What I am saying is that
the operation of blind market forces places limits on conscious social
planning.

Regards

Jurriaan


     --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---