Market fundamentalism as an ideology of global capitalism:

Market fundamentalism as an ideology of global capitalism: 150 years, the relevance of the Communist Manifesto Global capitalism of the nineteenth century. was the first period of the free movement of capital and that capitalism was more stable. Soros said that was then the single currency (gold), now three key currencies collide like tectonic plates. If the United Kingdom before spending free its "policy of gunboat diplomacy" to recover debts and restore order in the most remote corners of the globe, the U.S. police mission in the late twentieth century. faced many difficulties in its implementation. A new global capitalist system that emerged at the second attempt in 1980 (the first failed in the collapse of 1929), based on the ideology of perfect competition. It is assumed that markets tend towards equilibrium and this equilibrium point corresponds to the most efficient allocation of economic resources. Any restriction of competition reduces the efficiency of markets, and therefore introduces an absolute taboo against intervention in the market game. Such an ideology in the nineteenth century. called laissez-faire. In the twentieth century. there was a better term - market fundamentalism. Meaning of the term that everyone is fundamentalism fanaticism or belief taken to extremes, which presupposes the universal knowledge and answer all questions. In modern times, a place of religious fundamentalism has taken scientific fundamentalism. In the twentieth century. the status of a fundamental theory claiming Marxism in the twentieth century. during the period of post-modernity of the new global capitalism is replaced by market fundamentalism. A holy place is never empty! However, the ideology of laissez-faire has discredited itself, the rejection of this ideology was the result of the Great Depression and the product of the emergence of Keynesianism. Funny, but Soros wrote on this subject is something totally unacceptable to the liberal-marketeers: "In the early fifties, during my undergraduate years, the ideology of laissez-faire attitude was more negative than it is today to state intervention in the economy. Then submit that the ideology of laissez-faire could again return to their positions, it was impossible. I think the revival of market fundamentalism certainly not due to its scientific validity, but only with a belief in its magical power. President Reagan spoke of "the magic of the market," "invisible hand" is really, other than a magical tool, not name. Fundamentalism - it is always black and white world view, his opinions are based on the principle of "either-or." If a recognition that the economic argument, the opposite it can not be true. On this logic is built as a non sequitur, Marxism and market fundamentalism ".12 Further, Soros opposes Marxism and fundamentalism on the basic parameters: the negation of private property Marxism consistent denial of state intervention in the economy. However, in such a primitive form of either Marxism or fundamentalism does not exist. So, Soros describes the complicated construction of M. Friedman, subtle mathematical techniques and the enormous factual material, in which mere mortals it is difficult to understand. All the complex model of fundamentalists are focused on the definition of equilibrium conditions, which clearly recalls joking Soros, the medieval theological debates on the topic: how many angels can fit on a pinhead. However, total and unconditional rejection of Marxism Soros gives to his head - he believes that after the collapse of the Soviet system influence of Marxism "has practically disappeared," he himself Marxism discredited itself even earlier - during the excesses of Stalin's regime. Here Soros or wrong, or wishful thinking. With respect to the degradation of market fundamentalism, we should agree with Soros - is a particular issue. Yet he emphasized that bourgeois scientists can fully believe in the specific issues, but they should be criticized for ideological blindness and political partisanship in the common areas. So, Soros rightly assesses the phenomenon of global capitalism as the product of the ideology of fundamentalism: "Market fundamentalism plays a decisive role in the global capitalist system. He directs the actions of the most successful members, and its influence on policy is hard to overestimate. Without market fundamentalism, the very existence of the global capitalist system could hardly have spoken. Market fundamentalism has become dominant in the economy from about 1980, when the power in their countries came Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. The dominant trend of international competition for capital, there was before - thanks to the two oil crises and the development of the offshore Eurocurrency market - but only with political transformation, implemented by the Thatcher and Reagan, provided capital and entrepreneurship as such a dominant role. Since that time, mainstream and dominant subjective perceptions only reinforce each other ".13 With such a scientific assessment of fundamentalism, we can only agree. However, what is the real score of Marxism in the West unbiased scientists? For the 150 th anniversary of the publication of the Manifesto of the Communist Party in the United States was a wave of enthusiastic publications. We say that only bright headlines of these publications: "Marx was right," 14 "next Thinker: the return of Karl Marx", 15 "Marxist masterpiece - 150", 16 a series of articles about the birth of the Communist Manifesto, the new edition of the Communist Manifesto in 1998 , a new interpretation of the text. Prominent historian E. Hobsbawm writes that if he had been in 1991-1993. reported that 100 million people died during the experiment, a Marxist, he would have renounced Marxism. Today, scientists announced that circumstances have changed and we all need to change the point of view. First, data on 100 million victims I. Horowitz overstated and are engaged, and secondly, the mass killing under Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot is a "special kind of randomness." The same mass random killing of occurring of cancer from smoking. However, it should accept the fact that it was 15-20 million victims. What these figures show? They say that this loss has historically justified and that the birth of a new world is in terrible pain and requires the greatest stress. That's why Hobsbawm, in response to a question on his commitment to Communism today, after the horrors of capitalist globalization and postmodernity says he's a Marxist! 17 What is - denial law and return to the communist world view, or the formation of a new neosovremennogo worldview as the last barricade in front of the bourgeoisie victory for labor over capital?
Prof. Nekrasov, SN
1 D. Soros Open Society. Reforming global capitalism. M. 2001. P. 30 2 Ibid. C. 31. 3 Ibid. S. 173 4 Ibid. P. 174 5 Ibid. P. 175 6 Ibid. S. 176 7 Ibid. P. 194 8 Ibid. S. 221 9 Ibid. S. 235 10 Ibid. P. 240 11 Ibid. S. 242-243 12 Ibid. S. 265 13 Ibid. S. 266 14 The New Yorker. 20-27 Oct. 1997. P. 248-259 1915 New York Times Book Review. Jan. 1998 1916 New York Times Book Review / 26 apr. 1998. P.39 1917 Hamilton R.F. The Communist Manifesto at 150. / / Society. Vol. 38. # 4. May 2001. P. 75-90