Kapitalizam 101

Capitalism will run for a very long time because it was successful in transforming  humans into calculating machines endowed with limitless needs. What David  Landes saw as one of the main contributions of capitalism, better use of time and ability to express everything in terms of abstract purchasing power, has moved now into our private lives. We do not need capitalist mode of production in factories if we have all become capitalistic centers ourselves.  

So, what is really going on? When I interviewed social scientists all over the world – from São Paulo to Sydney, from Los Angeles to London – I started to see an unexpected picture emerge. We all know that every human being has basic physical needs: for food, for water, for shelter, for clean air. It turns out that, in the same way, all humans have certain basic psychological needs. We need to feel we belong. We need to feel valued. We need to feel we’re good at something. We need to feel we have a secure future. And there is growing evidence that our culture isn’t meeting those psychological needs for many – perhaps most – people. I kept learning that, in very different ways, we have become disconnected from things we really need, and this deep disconnection is driving this epidemic of depression and anxiety all around us.

Let’s look at one of those causes, and one of the solutions we can begin to see if we understand it differently. There is strong evidence that human beings need to feel their lives are meaningful – that they are doing something with purpose that makes a difference. It’s a natural psychological need. But between 2011 and 2012, the polling company Gallup conducted the most detailed study ever carried out of how people feel about the thing we spend most of our waking lives doing – our paid work. They found that 13% of people say they are “engaged” in their work – they find it meaningful and look forward to it. Some 63% say they are “not engaged”, which is defined as “sleepwalking through their workday”. And 24% are “actively disengaged”: they hate it.

Ako je osnovni oblik kapitalizma onaj monopolistički, onda je „normalan“ oblik ponašanja takvog kapitalizma, kao što je upečatljivo opisano u Imperijalizmima…, nastojanje da se izvozom kapitala u kolonije domaće profitne stope održe iznad „prirodnog“ nivoa, da se jeftina radna snaga i resursi zadrže pod kontrolom, kao i beskrajno sukobljavanje sa drugim monopolističkim nacionalnim kapitalizmima. To je, dakle, po Schumpeteru, osnovni modus operandi kapitalizma.
Tvrdnja da bi savršena konkurencija i slobodna trgovina bili nespojivi sa imperijalizmom više nije relevantna: čak i ako je to tačno, takva tvrdnja se odnosi na školske verzije kapitalizma koje će, smatra Schumpeter, biti istisnute dinamičnijim i inovativnijim monopolističkim kapitalizmom.
Povezujući ta dva nalaza dobijamo reformulisanu Schumpeterovu teoriju imperijalizma koja je veoma slična, gotovo identična sa klasičnim marksističkim teorijama imperijalizma, čak i u naglašavanju značaja niskih stopa prinosa u zemlji. Da li bi Schumpeter bio zapanjen takvim zaključkom, ili je to i sam već znao, nije od velikog značaja. U svakom slučaju, rekao bih da se bliskost ovih teorija ne može poreći.