portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article

Making the Capitalists Pay in India

Taking it back to those that profit from the forcible expansion of US markets -- wish more of this was going on.....
Taking it back to those that profit from the forcible expansion of US markets -- wish more of this was going on.....
psssst!!!! 25.Mar.2003 11:59

what..me worry?

(.....i'm not sure you've noticed and everything, but uh....well...it's hard to tell you this, but uh...shit...i don't know how to say it.....well, here goes, i'll try....



S O C I E T Y !!!!!!!!!

we always have, and with luck we always will. i hate to break the news, but it will probably never be otherwise. why, you might ask? well, a lot of reasons, really. but perhaps the most important one stems from the fact the YOU are the way you are. and I am the way i am.
in other words, people do things that _most_ people have decided are bad. we hurt each other.
we lie. we steal, we cheat, we even kill each other.
and we always have. many of us are hurting other people right now in the name of peace....both abroad and right here in stumptown usa.

this will likely always be the case. until such time as this is NOT the case, we must do the best we can with what we have. the choices come down to two main ones:
establish a society which takes into consideration our weaknesses and yet strives to confer upon the individual as much personal freedom as is possible, or (2) build a society where personal freedoms are minimised, limited, or outright denied, in order to establish a society which enhances the lives of a very, very few at the expense of the masses, such as in iraq. (ducking for cover...)

a capitalist system offers the individual more personal choices than any other system of government intended for a large, modern, technological society.
you may or may not be intellectually insulted and incensed that there are people living in the west hills who drive expensive cars and live in giant houses while there are people on 3rd and couch who are happy to find a half-eaten whopper in a city garbage can, but it is a fact that the man on the corner has more options facing him then does the same man in a totalitarian society. and so does the man in the hills. whether or not they avail themselves of these options is entirely up to them---not you, not me---them.

i have to assume that every single person that contributes to this site and takes part in the marches has great love for this country and its system of government...not neccessarily the people who are currently at the high end of the government right now...but for the style of government itself. by doing either of the above, you are taking part. in a capitalist enterprise. you are using a computer. that you or your school bought. you are using and possibly paying for a massive fiber-optic system of electronic communication. you can and do say anything you want. do you understand that there are places where this is simply not possible? have you ever asked yourself why you never see any posts here made by iraqi citizens? are they apathetic?

faults abound everywhere. because we kill.
any viable government is of neccessity a compromise.
the ultimate measure is how _much_ these compromises inhibit the expression of personal initiative and accountability.

sorry for shouting.

let's get rid of bush in '04.

Coke and Pepsi are trembling 25.Mar.2003 18:40


You you really think this generated some emergency Board of Directors meetings at Coke or Pepsi. "Oh we are doomed without our .001% market share in India".

All this managed to do is take food out of the mouths of some poor business owners trying to make a living and feed and house their children.

Before you cheer something like this, think about what was really accomplished.

psssst, you're ignorant 26.Mar.2003 00:11

dj tubesteak

Indymedia is a capitalist enterprise? That's interesting, considering that

a.) it's my understanding that the servers are donated and not anyone's private property, though I could be wrong. Nonetheless, even if someone does lay claim to ownership of the materials,

b.) those materials are not being used to generate a surplus of any commodity in order to make a profit (unless the conspiracy goes much deeper than anyone thought. and yes, that's a joke)

Contrary to what Bill O'Reilly, Steve Forbes, Anna Quindlen, LL Cool J, or your fourth-grade teacher told you, 'capitalism' is not simply a synonym for 'freedom'.

Capitalism is a specific type of economic system in which individuals or private groups of individuals lay claim to resources as private property (or 'capital') then utilize those resources to produce an amount of a given commodity that exceeds that needed to satisfy their own needs so that they can exchange the surplus for a portion of the surplus of another commodity that another party has produced, seeking to acquire a greater sum of value ('wealth') in exchange for their own surplus than the amount expended in producing that surplus ('profit') and contributing some portion of their wealth to an agency that uses coercive force to maintain normative standards of behavior among the population necessary to the perpetuation of the above described economic activities ('the state'). Capitalism is distinct from other economic systems such as mercantilism, in which private individuals acquire control of resources on behalf of a state in return for the license to direct a portion of those resources to their own profit, socialism, in which a state assumes control of production and distribution of derived wealth in exchange for the labor of private parties, syndicalism, in which individuals share access to a common pool of resources from which to derive wealth, and subsistence production, in which private parties utilize resources to produce an amount of wealth equal to that needed to satisfy their own needs. Various types of political systems can be attached to some or all of these economic systems.

A given population is not presented with a choice between 'capitalism' and 'totalitarianism'. Totalitarianism is a governmental structure (the intervention to a greater or lesser degree of a centralized authority in the affairs of every individual in a given population) that can be employed in the service of various economic systems and sociopolitical ideologies. Actually, in historical terms, totalitarian political systems have arisen specifically in relation to highly integrated industrial mass societies that are themselves the product of multiple generations of capitalist economic organization, whether trying to maintain the property relations of capitalism against organized internal threat, (Fascism) accelerate the development of pre-capitalist economies into industrial systems equivalent in size and productive power to capitalist economies(Leninism/Stalinism, Maoism), enhance the economic influence of economies on the peripheries of larger global capitalist systems (Ba'ath socialism), or subordinate capitalist modes of production to the perceived interests of a particular ethnic or national group (national socialism).
Because growth within a capitalist system is based on the production of surpluses and thus the dedication of increased amounts of any given private party's resources (in material, time, and labor) to the production of specific commodities in the interest of maximizing surplus, the tendency within any given capitalist economy as it develops will be toward increasing specialization and division of labor, which in social terms means increased interdependency between a growing number of private parties, increasing the interest any given party has in the regulation of other parties' behavior, which will eventually extend to parties who exert influence on the system through non-participation (i.e. the unemployed) or indirect participation (black markets, drug trades, etc.). The totalitarian response can occur more quickly or slowly depending upon such factors as attempts to 'skip steps' as in the Leninist example, reactions to crises (the American vs. the German responses to the Depression, for example), and interplay of preexisting social prejudices with practical socioeconomic concerns (same example). America is well on its way to a full-blown totalitarianism, it's simply been couched in benign gradualist terms rather than reactionary or utopian rhetoric and advanced a bit more cautiously than the more readily cited 20th-century examples, but I suspect once the failures of capitalism become too disruptive to conceal and ignore that will change, and in fact Ashcroft and co. have already taken notable strides toward accelerating the process, breaking with Clinton's attempts to keep it under the radar rather than justify it with scare tactics.

Capitalism and totalitarianism are two manifestations of the same historical historical forces. We do not choose between the two. On the contrary, we will, probably sooner than we think, be presented with the choice of whether our attachment to the more extraneous pleasures of the one will thwart our resistance against the steady advance of the other. Personally, I've made my decision and hope I have the fortitude to abide by it when push comes to shove. What's yours?