Growth is genetically inscribed – Alt fails

2. Capitalism and the Panacea of Economic Growth From a Marxist perspective, we will argue below that economic growth is “genetically” inscribed in the very nature of capitalism as a historically specific mode of production. On the other hand, mainstream theories, but also the historical evidence concerning the development of capitalism, indicate that the periodical fluctuations and occasional crises of capitalism can be partially smoothed out only through some type of time-fixing and/or space-fixing (see Harvey1982). As is well known, the time-fixing concerns the expansion of (effective) demand and is associated with credit expansion and state intervention, under the influence of the theory of J. M. Keynes. This type of policy, without resolving the internal contradictions and failures of capitalism, constitutes an uncertain flight forward and a postponement of crisis. The space-fixing may also concern the expansion of demand, but also all the preconditions for a profitable production and sale of the com- modities produced. It is associated with the expansion of international trade, all forms of capital flows, international contradictions, and imperialism. This type of policies or pro- cesses may ensure a temporary stabilization and development of capitalism, but may also constitute a short-sighted shift or relocation of the problem to another country (Overbeek 2012). Both these policies (time- and space-fixing) may, in the short run, ensure or improve the conditions for the stabilization and economic growth of capitalism, regardless of the likelihood of generating a greater instability and destructive ecological implications (Sti- glitz2003,8–9). What we have here is a systemic failure of capitalism and the market mechanism to ensure a socially rational and effective allocation of the productive resources available, an adequate and socially legitimate satisfaction of social needs, an acceptable level and advancement of social welfare, and an ecological compatibility of all socio-econ-omic activity (Swyngedouw 2009). Instead of tackling this fundamental failure, capitalist governments and business executives escape with a flight forward and a global expansion. In other words, they eschew to economic growth, while indirectly increasing the economic and ecological fragility of the planetary socio-ecological system. What is astonishing, even if not paradoxical, is that this growth imperative of capitalism is generally acceptable, not only by the social forces of capital and state institutions, but also by working people and their collective agents (labor unions and associations). Capitalist agents cogently consider economic growth as a precondition of increased sales of commodities and profit maximization. And though capitalist accumulation may also pro- ceed through a process of“accumulation by dispossession,”as Harvey (2003) has pointed out, growth is the main vehicle of capital accumulation. The operatives and the political personnel of the state are also in favor of, and tend to promote economic growth for sev- eral reasons. A large number of public works, an increasing volume of investments (public and private), and a growing economic activity imply an increase of public (tax) revenues and a greater employment of labor, apparently promoting social welfare. In this sense, higher rates of economic growth seem to indicate a more successful public administration and a higher economic performance, which are a precondition for the re-election of pol- itical personnel. This also applies to elected cadre, municipal leaders and decentralized social agents. In the case of extensive corruption, economic growth and an increased volume of public provision or an increased number of entrusted works are a fine oppor- tunity for state functionaries and political or municipal leaders to collect various commissions. But working people and their collective agents seem also to be content with higher rates of economic growth. In a capitalist society, where an extensive reserve army of labor is a precondition for the profitable investment of capital and the right to decent work and life is not warranted, workers and their unions are usually satisfied with a few more employ- ment places or a promised reduction of employment lay-offs. Under conditions of declin- ing public employment, as is the case in the current context of a dominant neo-liberalism, working people are entrapped, to an even greater degree, in the vagaries and uncertainties of the labor market. Employment positions, as a result of business expansion and econ- omic growth, are usually offered to working people as a favor or gift, while in fact they are a source of surplus value and profit extraction. Instead of demanding appropriate work ensuring a decent income, workers and unions appear, also, to consent to economic growth. Thus, a nearly general consensus on economic growth tends to arise. It is in this sense that Swyngedouw (2014, 91) speaks of a rising de-politicization and“a naturalization of the need of economic growth and capitalism as the only reasonable and possible form of organization of socio-natural metabolism.” Growth appears as a panacea for the resolution of all problems. With the dominant role of mass media reproducing this perception, it is nowadays hard to object to the necessity of economic growth. And yet, as will be argued further below, economic growth tends to undermine the fundamental sources of all social wealth, labor and nature, and it is for this reason that a great number of radical and Marxist critics have targeted economic growth (see Altvater2001; Andreasson2005; Herrera2011; Alvarez Lozano2012; Dale2012; Sanders2016). However, what is here important to point out is that, the systemic necessity of growth under capitalism and the growth consensus outlined above give rise to a powerful growth ideology. In fact, growth is not merely the result of an ideology, but stems from the nature and the internal dynamics of capital. The competitive and exploitative character of capitalism and its purpose of exchange value and profit maximization directly imply the necessity of a continuous growth. Simultaneously, the growth ideology developed particularly during the post-war period has significantly served the reinforcement of the process of economic growth and its social legitimation, despite all the negative social and ecological implications. For reasons already noted, and insofar as economic growth is a precondition for the expanded reproduction of capital, the productivism lying behind economic growth tends to obscure the class character of the social relations of production, and to blunt rather than help develop the class consciousness of the working class.