Looking for answers

Did you read the last thing I wrote? Maybe the answers are clear to you already. You know how to sail away from the Titanic of western capitalism. Let the rest of us know if you wouldn't mind.

In the meantime, this is what I was thinking: Capitalism maybe collapsing in the west, but is it really being saved - as a system - as a civilisation - by the east? What is it, that is being saved? What are the main features of this latest stage of Capitalism?

First, there is the unique polarisation of wealth and society. There have been huge divides in wealth before, but today is different. It is as though the super rich have given up on the general cause of humanity. Thatcher's (in)famous comment that there is no such thing as society has come true for her sons and daughters. Thatcher's ancestors would have had very definite views about the way the world should run and what the purpose was of the civilisation /empire that they were trying to build. So did Henry Ford. So did JFK. So did Churchill. Now the super rich have discovered that there is no object, no set of freedoms, no religious or educational bequest that they have in mind for the rest of us. Stay where you are. Work harder. Die quietly. Change nothing. These are the key messages for the future of the 99%. And, naturally, ruling class politics follows.

Even in China, Mao's thought 'all is turmoil and chaos under the heavens; the prospects are good!' is an anathema to the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party. They suppress all creative thought and action in China and, hesitantly, offer bailouts to favoured parts of the west. Their main mantra is stability at all costs.

In one sense the new nature of capitalist civilisation is summed up by, on the one hand the enclaves of the super rich and on the other, the massive decline of standards of life for the working class in the west while workers and toilers in the rest of the world fight across margins without the slightest security, that are literally inches away from starvation and an early death. And none of the 'giants' of this new world has a single idea, or even an interest, in reforming the world in any sort of new direction.

So capitalism is not 'conquering all before it.' It, as a social system, as a civilisation, has entered its old age. Its offspring are only interested in the will. Its main motivation is not to overcome poverty, or disease, or ignorance, or even to reach the stars. Put simply, it fears death.

Capitalism is not more powerful today. The paradox is that it is weaker than it has been since it roared into its heritage and built its empires three centuries ago. As an international political system it has never been weaker. Can a WW1 or WW2 be imagined today? The mightiest power on earth has just failed in two minor wars. A couple of decades ago the US simultaneously put down three revolutions in Central America. What can they do now about Chavez? About developments in Bolivia?

When we are shaken by Capitalism's seismic movement, its apparent capacity to weather any crisis, we are actually staring into a mirror. And mistaking our own weakness for our opponent's strength. Western capitalism cannot use imperialism any more to protect itself from the price of labour in the east. The great structures of the last two hundred years are melting, like the walls of glaciers, into the sea. Looking at our own infant frailty is not the equivalent to endorsing the superhuman immortality of our parent.

Next: OK - not their strength.  But we ARE too weak. Aren't we?