Contemporary capitalism can be termed as a concept that mainly lingers on the around Marxism in regards to the ‘periodization’ of capitalism. According to Streeck, the long debates that hint contemporary capitalism aim to bring huge changes in the basis of social reproduction. This also challenges the characteristics of the trends of capitalism that seem not to be clear and identifying new trends and features that present themselves across regions, sectors and countries. This paper aims to give an insight on the paradigms that make up capitalism. In the same order, it explains the available alternatives that exist to transform contemporary capitalism. It makes it clear that there are possible alternatives that have been implemented but they are not conclusive since they all have weaknesses. Wright observes that the compromise in these alternatives makes it hard to change the social, democratic, and governmental organizations that govern capitalism. Capitalism stands to be a system and as nature explains all types, systems have possible weaknesses. However, capitalism has been able to stand tall and seem to resist all types of alternatives that try to transform it. Despite the long debates that seek to find alternatives that would transform the concept behind capitalism, there are still strong clams that show there are no alternatives to contemporary capitalism.
The term capitalism relates to the social systems, which is now present in every country. Capitalism involves the production and distribution of goods controlled by a small minority of individuals in a country, referred to as the capitalists. The working class, offer their services capitalists in the form of work, to earn a salary or a wage. The capitalists gain profits by selling what they produce and distribute at the expense of the working class. They then opt to accumulate more wealth by reinvesting some of the profits they gain. On the other hand, contemporary capitalism has no any specific theoretical basis.
Contemporary capitalism greatly influences the schematics of social reproduction in the form of economic dynamics accumulation and the capitalist state. All the general facets of capitalist society are attracted to conform to the present competitive and organizational imperatives. Through this pattern, the society ends up being characterized theoretically in several ways. Like looking at the alteration from mass production technologies to those related to microelectronic, which has for a long time taken root as a shift from Fordism to post-Fordism. In addition, the transition of macroeconomic intervention in regards of shifting from Keynesian state to a neoliberal state. When one identifies specific ways of capital accumulation of capital at an expense of the working class are considered to be as a principle of contemporary capitalism. Sitton states that the present features that are not static so they can be, like the internationalization of capital, or the arrangement of the labor process, or the organizational features of a specific state in regards to other sectors of regulation and harmonization of industrial and financial capital. There have been several attempts through debates on the contemporary capitalism in regards to the Marxian political economy to break down the developments that happen today. The developments hint on the ‘general laws’ that govern the capitalist mode of production and also the one that governs the procedures and the features of the production, distribution, and appropriation of value. They also try to point out other qualities of class struggles and social relations that that on the outward look give a notion of more spatially bounded.
The concept behind this type of capitalism assumes that capitalism has changed, thus, there are new features behind the very nature that builds its concept and class struggles of the earlier notion. Through contemporary capitalism, the living standards of individuals have grown to be better, not forgetting the flourishing state of their environment. The situations stretched to all countries including the low-income countries, as their private capital flow was six times better in 2001 compared to the year 1990. The foreign direct investments in these countries have brought financial relief like the rise in income, increase in tax revenue to the government and employment opportunities. However, Kibbey states that the practice of capitalism seems to be unsustainable. The main motive for venturing into capitalism is to sell good at a profit, and less likely aiming to satisfy the need of the people. The production process initiated by the capitalist is not based on the amount of money consumers are willing to spare to satisfy their needs but to the calculations of capitalist to what they consider as profit. Amin and Patrick argue that it is not just a matter of greed that capitalist yearn for profits; they lack any say on the conditions that come with being capitalists. They simply need to make profits in order to secure their investment and the fact that they face completion from other capitalists make them reinvest their profits to stay relevant as capitalists who are at par with the current knowledge and technologies. For long, it has been clear that capitalism is the chief cause of many problems that exist in the world such as alienation, war, and starvation. There has always been something about what people really desire and what they hold dear. The fact that people do not get satisfied with what they have, capitalism would always appear the way it has always been since its genesis.
According to Fisher, capitalist realism is a notion that has widely grown to dictate and assume that capitalism forms the only proper and fundamental political, economic system. Today many capitalists consider 'Capital Realism' as a conceptual prop that many people, sectors, regions, countries have come to accept. In recent times, the concept of capitalism has continued to transform from the commonly popular social system that combines several alternatives to progress the production process to a concept of being the only achievable order. When the actual states along the Eastern Bloc collapsed, the notion of ideological legitimation presented itself as a consequence of capitalism transformation. With time, the available alternatives and the regimes that were present to transform capitalism have continued to disappear leaving capitalism as the only favorable system. Capitalist realism has been able to change the mind of contemporary individuals, showing them limits and barriers that do not exist even in imagination or thoughts. When one considers capitalist realism, it is relatively unrealistic for one to think there can exist alternatives that can be put organized to influence capitalism.
Capitalist realism promotes a type of temporary nature in its existing system, since it bases its concept in the present and solely the present, eliminating the fact that history occurs when time passes. According to the conditions presented by capital realism, one can conclude that the near future would have the same features as the present, thus presenting no changes. According to Fukuyama’s capitalist realism had some certain truth and sincerity at the beginning or its genesis. In the beginning, the world was stable, and its trade lines were near to perfection and surrounded by lasting peace. However, Fisher begs to differ as he replies to Fukuyama’s sentiments by retorting that the whole concept of capitalist realism is based on the ‘normalization of crisis.’ However, Fukuyama is frankly right through his vision that involves a conceptual self-image that concerns the post-Cold War period that would witness dominance and affect the boundaries of political possibility and openly giving an insight that capitalism would become the ultimate system destroying its main challengers making it remain superior in all sense. Since capitalist realism dwells on the present, it denies people a chance to experience the significance the past and a feel for what the future has to offer. Without the past or the future, the present has no meaning. The same can be said about contemporary people as their world shows a visible representation of sadness and void of hope. Psychologically, this situation is precarious to the health of an individual as it rises the anxiety levels affecting one livelihood.
Capitalist realism on the outer seems to be seamless and includes both the social and individual systems. The true nature of capitalism extrudes from a measure of capitalist realism’s efficiency as an ideology. However, in nature, no ideological system is as dominant as it may look on the outside as they all have a weakness. The only way contemporary realism can be transformed id through the realization of its contradictions, gaps, and tensions, however, this can only occur if the whole concept of capitalism proves to be inconsistent or weak. The chief contradictions of capitalist realism include mental health and bureaucracy, changing or altering this contradiction to an equal platform is near to impossible.
Hallward explains that in recent times, the declaration of the free market availability to consumers was considered to be liberating for individuals. However, this is not the case as it spurs anxiety, as there is no security; therefore, consumers’ status and views are under constant review. The situation is not pleasing as it ignites health problems specifically depression. Due to mental illness, some capitalist may argue that contemporary capitalism may not be the only dominant system that exists but a dysfunctional one.
The alternative to contemporary capitalism can be in the form of cooperative economy. The alternative integrates civil objectives and social, and it gives the public ownership in production thus they are able to benefit. However, the alternatives that should be used to transform capitalism all have weaknesses, for this reason, capitalism should be seen as a system that is not perfect and offers utopia rather it should be seen as a system that needs to be remade from time to time. The libertarian alternative that exists in the circles of capitalism bases its assumption on the nature of personal property, which means the theoretical foundations are not at all generally accepted. Given that, the foundations may not be compatible with the social stability, it only means there exist an inherent inequality with the foundations. Rogers stresses that there is no correct alternative for contemporary capitalism but through constant experimentation and pluralism, and individuals can realize a post-capitalist future.
In recent times, the challenges concerning bank bailouts and credit crisis have significantly decreased the meaning of neo-liberalism and as a result, there is an occurrence of a huge space that allows strategic movement on the left. However, the crisis at hand surrounding neoliberalism does not yet fit to be a crisis related to capital realism and in the along the way the left is still joined to modes of imagination and procedures of social organizations that deny it the chance of utilizing the crisis in an attempt to pose a challenge to capitalism. The individuals on the left were very hopeful some of them even knew that the credit crisis had the power to challenge and defeat capitalism, there were even conspiracies that tried to prove the collapse of capitalism, though, this has not been the case as capitalism is still strong as it was. What happened instead is that the bank bailouts played a big role in reaffirming that there is no alternative to the contemporary capitalist. The banking system disintegrated, and many capitalist thought this move to be unthinkable. The assumptions surrounding neoliberalism were primarily affected by affected by the crisis while individuals of capitalist realist’ remained the same, unperturbed.
The transformation of capitalism can engage some alternative like libertarianism, which focuses on improving the process of production, exchange, and distribution for the benefit of the working class and consumers. Then the socialist and cooperative organization present alternatives that aim to challenge the existing operation process of the production, exchange, and distribution of goods. There needs to be a promotion of social relationships for the production of useful products rather than basing all efforts in the accumulation of profit at the expense of the working class; this describes the same logic that the socialist and the cooperative alternatives are based on. However, this does not mean that the latter alternatives would provide a 'utopia' in the contemporary capitalism circle. All the alternatives that exist to transform capitalism face critical challenges that affect the sustainability and the reproduction of unfairness within contemporary capitalism. To achieve a form of utopia from any alternative that would affect capitalism individuals need to ignore the principals of economy and society, translating to the resistance of recognizing the desired outcomes from the interaction people have on a daily basis. Despite the impacts of the capitalism alternatives, social relations between individuals need to be reflected upon in order to promote making critical decision aimed at rebuilding or resisting our immediate habitation in this world. He fact that contemporary capitalism offers only a taste of the present and not the future it makes it rather hard to apply alternatives that would not pose to have weakness in the long run. In understanding the past, the present and the future for a social and individual organization can be manipulated appropriately through strategic alternatives that would affect the society positively. Capitalism creates a bigger picture of democracy and the government single handedly; this means it has an impact on a larger part of the globe and the efforts that should be put to transform it to favor both the capitalists and the working classes should be more than just conventional alternatives. There needs to be a combined effort between the two classes in order to achieve positive results and have a future where production, distribution, and exchange favor everyone. The alternatives offered have been tested and they all have weaknesses and the claims presented by different authors ignite a strong opposition that the alternatives present are not at par to change the organization of capitalism so it is right to say there are no alternatives to contemporary capitalism.
Bibliography
Amin, Samir and Patrick Camiller. (2003) Obsolescent Capitalism. London: Zed Books, 5-7.
Fisher, Mark. 2009. Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative? Winchester: Zero Books, 1-7.
Fukuyama, F. ‘The End of History?’ The National Interest, No. 16, 3-18.
Hallward, Peter. 2009. ‘The Will of the People: Notes Towards a Dialectical Voluntarism’, Radical Philosophy, 155: 17-29.
Heslam, Peter. "Ustainable Capitalism: Is It Possible?". Jri.Org.Uk. 2016. http://www.jri.org.uk/news/sustainable_capitalism.htm
Jameson, Fredric 1991, Postmdernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, London: Verso, 12-13.
Kibbey, Ann. 2005. Theory Of The Image. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2-3.
Rogers, C. 2014. Capitalism and Its Alternatives, London: Zed, 113-151.
Sitton, John F. 1996. Recent Marxian Theory. Albany: State University of New York Press, 8-10.
Streeck, Wolfgang. 2015. "Modern Capitalism’S Death Spiral". Citizen Action Monitor. https://citizenactionmonitor.wordpress.com/2015/04/20/modern-capitalisms-death-spiral/.
Watson, M & C. Hay. 2003. ‘The discourse of Globalisation and the logic of no alternative: rendering the contingent necessary in the political economy of New Labour’ Policy & Politics, 31:3, pp. 289-305.
Wright, E. O. 2010. Envisioning Real Utopias, London: Verso, chapter 3, chapter 4, 15-17.
