Rosa Luxemburg saw the rise and development of capitalist production methods as a production of violence; as expansion, conquering, annihilation and violent upheaval of social milieus; and as a form of socialisation that ostracises people socially and destroys progressive, natural and social living conditions. Her concept of “land grabbing,” which ties the complete implementation of newly created added value to the existence and conquering of precapitalist socio-economic milieus, must be viewed critically and can be adjusted. Such critique is necessary to explain the accumulation of capital in view of the capital relationships that have since arisen. It is possible to adjust the theory because Luxemburg studied the basic relationships of capitalist production methods in their historical development, revealing the players in the accumulation process along with their interests and behaviour. Thus she demonstrated why members of society who produce and circulate added value can also be interested in the development of productive forces under freedom in equality. (ii) Luxemburg’s “land grabbing” can be interpreted as resource procurement, exploitation of new opportunities such as spaces for utilising tangible capital and as the securing of societal or socio-political preconditions for capital accumulation, for capitalist production methods. Adopting her understanding of socialist policy, theoretical work must constantly interrogate and search for courses of action for players promoting emancipation and solidarity, while considering their consequences. The concept of land grabbing is helpful in two ways. First, it aids the communication and collaboration of scholars studying (financial) capital accumulation, financialisation, and critiques of modern growth and capitalism. Second, it is a practical working concept for social and political alliances. “End the land grab!” can be a lasting offensive battle cry, helping create solidarity among those attacked and oppressed socially and globally in matching, similar and widely divergent ways. (iii) Financialisation can be explained as a specific form of land grabbing and thus as a response to (financial) capital’s need to reproduce itself. It proceeds as follows: a) Financial relationships expand with the growth of the societal distribution of labour/socialisation and capital accumulation or capitalist forms of production. b) Liquid money or monetary capital is transformed into interest-bearing capital, a.k.a. “fictitious capital”. This is concentrated, centralised, and transported by financial institutions. c) Money is circulated by financial market players and financial markets, and the entire society’s production and reproduction process is permeated by financial market players and financial operations. This changes production, distribution, circulation and consumption, and increases problems in reproduction and implicit contradictions. d) Financial market players and operations permeate society. e) Financial market players and operations have a consistent or growing determining effect on the socialisation of production, the economic sphere and both private and social life.
Posted on: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 16:41:33 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015