Paul Mason - Postcapitalism

[@mallickarjun]

Great talk! It stimulates the thought process. My compliments

[@dinnerwithfranklin2451]

Really good talk. Thanks

[@Borishal]

I bought the book straight away.

[@Borishal]

Nah. Great stuff. Bit scary.

[@Tess78uk]

+Rashid Mostafa I bought it too! I have a feeling this man is a bit of a visionary...

[@Tess78uk]

+Dave Long what sophisticated analytical input Dave.

[@mikenowacki9729]

It sounds like he's ripping off Alan Watts

[@Gikaser]

Tess78uk it really is.

[@stndsure7275]

Keeping this short - The answer has to do with the distribution of the means (as well as the risks) of production through mandatory Employee Stock Ownership and profit sharing plans, co-operatives, as well as recognizing and expanding on the fact of natural public-private partnership. Eliminate the myth of the invisible hand. The point is not to eliminate or minimize government - it is to apply the same effective management theories to government that changed business in the 20th century. Put in place Total Quality Management, team building and Incremental Improvement schemes at all levels of government and business - that involve representatives of all stake-holders in the system. This is a fully entangled/interdependent -systems approach consistent with the way reality functions rather than an Individualist- exceptionalist approach which is a fiction that just concentrates wealth and destroys the middle class.

[@robertdevries1049]

The granularity of autonomous socialism means on it's own, none of these embryonic projects can survive without base, that could be a state, or it could be something else. Without the militant revolutionary movement, capital is no incentive to change itself, and capitalism is a system based on self interest. In this way people can begin to see how capitalism is autonomous, and if capital, and the agents of capital, are compelled to transform by some sort of critical movement or praxis outside of itself, it will go on replicating regressive forms, and ultimately corporate forms. Autonomous social and economic organization needs the political and corresponding social movement, otherwise it becomes reduced and degenerates in to system of purely self interested individuals, the political movement compels capitalism to reshape itself, it would have otherwise never done it on it's own accord, because capital cannot think any other way.

[@donbroni]

Great!! Where can I download his book for free 😂😂

[@AcademyNS]

Markets have always existed. The evolution past capitalism does not mean markets disappear.

[@Tess78uk]

Effing love Paul Mason. He’s a lion of a man and smart as they come. Neoliberal economies have their days numbered...

[@Unprotected1232]

Can someone tell him that the central bank money ( also known as narrow money or M0) only makes up a small percentage of the total money supply. Coins and notes are issued by the central bank for minor transactions and reserves are used by banks to manage transactions on the behalf of bank customers. Note that reserves are by definition a liability of a central bank. This means that only those with an account in the central bank can get access to reserves. That someone is the banks and sometimes the state. You don't. Therefore having a central bank pouring reserves into the system (like with QE) won't automatically cause hyperinflation. (and if the banks actually decided to use the excess reserves from QE to make new loans it can simply engage in a open market operation to sort things out. Consequently no hyperinflation will occur unless the central bank is incompetent.)

[@Notecrusher]

Does Mason suggest that QE will cause hyper-inflation? I'd be surprised -- critics were predicting that at the beginning, but they were proven wrong years ago. He doesn't say anything like that in the book.

[@peregrinedalziel4999]

Years later. BUT the excess reserves can allow greater lending and could lead to bank deposits and spending sufficient to drive inflation....and if there were a supply side shock as well hyperinflation could set in in. though in a developed and diverse economy this is a very small small chance. Probably not a real possiblity if we look at Japan for an example.

[@startupanalytica]

So if we let the non-market activities loose, wiithout intellectual property, and the people will have universal basic income then what is left for the market sector? Will there cease to be millionaires and billionaires with higher taxation? How would the state and market sector sustain itself?

[@randomperson2606]

He completely dodged answering the question on automation

[@CosmicClaire99]

He contradicts himself when he says that we can automate everything and pay everyone some kind of state wage or pension, and then a few minutes later he says we will need to import a hundred million or more people from the third world to drive the economic growth. Why would we need them if we have it all automated? Japan is planning to deal with their shrinking population with automation. Then in fifty years you have Japan, automated, with a smaller native population still living in a land where there is still the culture of their ancestors and they have not had their identity eroded by huge demographic influxes of aliens who don't respect the history of the land and the indigenous people who have their own unique identity.

[@stap0510]

+Cosmic Claire You bring up a good point of his contradiction. People should stop labor migration. Especially from low wage countries, whose culture and background differs greatly form that of the host country. We see this mistake being made all the time here in Western Europe. And we have serious tensions in the EU because of it.

[@martonvaitkus632]

Hard leftists like Mason are almost universally pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel. Why is this "hurr durr, what about Israel" argument so popular among alt-righters? Is it because the slavishly pro-Israel atmosphere of mainstream US politics? Even there, most of the far-left "SJW" people like to refer to Israel as an "apartheid state".

[@robertdevries1049]

While we perceive ourselves as technologically more advanced the Cuba, in reality, capitalism is just catching up to these systems in terms of social organization, which means only recently has capital degenerated enough that it acknowledges the inevitability an economic system that has finite life. Unfortunately, some of these revolution, especially those in developing and third world nations, have only been able to preserve their revolutions either through critical collaboration with international capital, democratic centralism....or just straight centralism, and this centralism comes at the expense of some liberty with most of the left would probably acknowledge. That being said, and I don't live in Cuba so I don't get a say, it's likely the remaining social projects, whether they are a Leninist state, parliamentary social democracy, radical democracy, or some other systems will have to adapt to a capitalist system that is finally open to a critique of itself, even if it still clings to certain aspects of the market and syndicalism. I would be lying if I said there isn't a certain national pride at play in wanting to finally build an American social project, but this can only work if the United States was to except new voices in a multi polar hegemony and a significantly less imperialistic foreign policy. Diplomacy is cheaper than war, our own social project would strengthen the solidarity of working people in the first world, but it might preserve some US influence as well, but hopefully a significantly less aggressive stance internationally at the sometime.

[@Kevydee1982]

I'll just stand a foot to the right of these two mics, that ok?

[@peregrinedalziel4999]

This man is a bit of a polymath it seems.

[@Barrobroadcastmaster]

I'd prefer we get to Postsocialism.