CABBALA
“Cabbala—a medieval mystical religious ‘doctrine’ prevalent among the most fanatical followers of Judaism, as well as among adherents of Christianity and Islam. The basic thought of the doctrine is the symbolic interpretation of the Holy Scripture, whose every word and number acquires special mystical importance in the eyes of the Cabbalists.” —Note 106, LCW 38.
CABET, Étienne (1788-1856)
Utopian socialist and author of Voyage en Icarie.
CADETS (CONSTITUTIONAL-DEMOCRATIC PARTY)
“The chief party of the liberal-monarchist bourgeoisie in Russia. It was formed in October 1905 and included representatives of the bourgeoisie, landowning Zemstvo members, and bourgeois intelligentsia. Prominent leaders of the Cadets included P.N. Milyukov, S.A. Muromtsev, V.A. Maklakov, A.I. Shingaryov, P.B. Struve, and F.I. Rodichev. While calling themselves the party of ‘people’s freedom’, the Cadets in reality sought to make a bargain with the autocracy in order to preserve tsarism in the form of a constitutional monarchy. After the February revolution, as a result of a bargain with the S.R.-Menshevik leaders of the Petrograd Soviet, the Cadets had a leading place in the bourgeois Provisional Government and pursued an anti-popular, counter-revolutionary policy favorable to the American, British and French imperialists. After the October Socialist Revolution the Cadets became irreconcilable enemies of Soviet power and took an active part in all the counter-revolutionary actions and campaigns of the interventionists. After the rout of the interventionists and whiteguards, the Cadets fled abroad and continued their anti-Soviet activity.” —Note 8, Lenin, SW 3 (1967).
CADRE
[In revolutionary parties or countries:] Personnel who spend a large part of their time educating,
organizing and leading others in political or economic work.
“The cadres of our Party and state are ordinary workers and not overlords sitting on the backs of the people.” —Mao, quoted in Peking Review, #38, Sept. 17, 1971, p. 13.
CADRES — Participation in Labor
“On the question of cadres participating in labor. Cadres must take part in labor. At present, this question has not yet been satisfactorily resolved. Leading cadres should go and stay in selected primary units and should not solely listen to briefings and reports. Even ministers should go and stay in some primary units.” —Mao, “Interjection at a Briefing by Four Vice-Premiers” (May 1964), SW 9:87.
CALCULUS [Mathematics:]
1. The major branch of mathematical analysis
consisting of the differential and integral calculus. Also known, rather inappropriately, but for
historical reasons, as the “infinitesimal calculus”. The differential calculus studies the
properties of a given curve at a specific point on it (such as its slope or rate of change), while
the integral calculus studies the overall properties of the given curve, such as the area beneath
it (or in the case of three dimensional curves, the volume they enclose).
2. Other branches of mathematics, logic, or
organized thought, which involve calculation, generally involving the use of special symbols or
notation, such as the propositional calculus
in symbolic logic.
See also below, and:
DERIVATIVE [Math],
DIFFERENTIAL CALCULUS,
INTEGRAL CALCULUS,
INFINITESIMAL,
INFINITESIMAL CALCULUS,
INSTANTANEOUS VELOCITY,
LIMIT [Math],
PREDICATE CALCULUS
CALCULUS — Development Of
See also:
INTEGRAL CALCULUS [Gellert quote],
INFINITESIMAL
“The calculus had its origin in the logical difficulties encountered by the ancient Greek mathematicians in their attempt to express their intuitive ideas on the ratios or proportionalities of lines, which they vaguely recognized as continuous, in terms of numbers, which they regarded as discrete. It became involved almost immediately with the logically unsatisfactory (but intuitively attractive) concept of the infinitesimal. Greek rigor of thought, however, excluded the infinitely small from geometrical demonstrations and substituted the circumventive but cumbersome method of exhaustion. Problems of variation were not attacked quantitatively by Greek scientists. No method could be developed which would do for kinematics what the method of exhaustion had done for geometry—indicate an escape from the difficulties illustrated by the paradoxes of Zeno.” —Carl B. Boyer, The History of the Calculus and its Conceptual Development (NY: Dover, 1959 [1949]), p. 4.
“The application of this new type of analysis [a dialectical analysis of variability by Scholastic philosophers], together with the free use of the suggestive infinitesimal and the more extensive application of numerical concepts, led within a short time to the algorithms of Newton and Leibniz, which constitute the calculus. Even at this stage, however, there was no clear conception of the logical basis of the subject. The eighteenth century strove to find such a basis, and although it met with little success in this respect, it did in the effort largely free the calculus from intuitions of continuous motion and geometrical magnitude. Early in the following century the concept of the derivative was made fundamental, and with the rigorous definitions of number and of the continuum laid down in the latter half of the century, a sound foundation was completed. Some twenty-five hundred years of effort to explain a vague instinctive feeling for continuity culminated thus in precise concepts which are logically defined but which represent extrapolations beyond the world of sensory experience.” —Carl B. Boyer, ibid.
“The fundamental definitions of the calculus, those of the derivative and the integral, are now so clearly stated in textbooks on the subject, and the operations involving them are so readily mastered, that it is easy to forget the difficulty with which these basic concepts have been developed. Frequently a clear and adequate understanding of the fundamental notions underlying a branch of knowledge has been achieved comparatively late in its development. This has never been more aptly demonstrated than in the rise of the calculus.” —Carl B. Boyer, ibid., p. 5.
CALCUTTA
See: KOLKATA
CALIPH (or CALIF)
[Arabic: khalifah “successor”] The top leader (temporal and spiritual) of a Muslim community,
though this precise title is often informal. Different Islamic communities and sects acknowledge
different top leaders, most of whom today have other official titles.
Differences about who should be considered the
caliph, or top leader of Islam, go back to the period following the death of Mohammed. The Sunni
branch of Islam, to which about 83% of Muslims today adhere, believe that Abu Bakr, the father-in-law
of Mohammed, was the first caliph. However, the Shiite branch, the other main sect, believes that Ali,
the son-in-law of Mohammed, was the first caliph.
See also:
IMAM
CALL or CALL OPTION
See: OPTION
CALLING [One’s Path in Life]
“We cannot always attain the position to which we believe we are called; our relations in society have to some extent already begun to be established before we are in a position to determine them.... If he works only for himself, he may perhaps become a famous man of learning, a great sage, and excellent poet, but he can never be a perfect, truly great man.” —Marx, “Reflections of a Young Man on the Choice of a Profession”, written while Marx was still in gymnasium [“High School”], MECW 1:4,8. Marx later adopted his life motto: “To work for mankind.”
CALORIC THEORY OF HEAT
An obsolete and long abandoned scientific theory of the nature of heat, popular during the 18th to
mid-19th century, which (along with the new understanding that combustion consisted of the rapid
combination of oxygen with other elements) replaced the phlogiston
theory. The caloric theory itself was eventually replaced by the modern theory of
thermodynamics.
The caloric theory viewed heat as an indestructable
fluid of zero density which surrounded particles of ordinary matter. While this theory, like the
phlogiston theory, sounds extremely foolish today, it was worked out to a remarkable degree. The
temperature of a body was thought to depend on the amount of “caloric” that it contained. Thermal
expansion was explained by the self-repulsive character of large amounts of the highly elastic
caloric fluid. Because caloric was indestructable and could move from one body to another, the
conservation of heat in calorimetry experiments was assured by this theory. These and other ad hoc
supports to the caloric theory made it difficult to overthrow until the much more sophisticated theory
of thermodynamics was substantially elaborated and backed with massive evidence, especially by the
physicist James Prescott Joule.
“In 1822, [Joseph] Fourier published his mathematical theory of heat conduction in solids based on a differential equation that indicates that the rate of flow of heat through a unit area perpendicular to an x-axis is proportional to the temperature gradient (rate of change of temperature, dT/dx) in the x-direction. It is interesting that Fourier wrote and developed his theory in terms of ‘caloric theory,’ an incorrect theory that held that changes in temperature are due to the transfer of an invisible and weightless fluid called caloric. Nevertheless, Fourier’s Law of Heat Conduction is correct and in agreement with experiments, even if Fourier’s idea of the nature of heat was not. As discussed in the introduction of this book, a law can explain how the universe works, even if the researcher who discovered the law is not quite sure why it works.” —Clifford Pickover, Archimedes to Hawking (2008), p. 235.
CALVINISM
A form of fatalistic Christianity put forth by John Calvin (1509-64) and
his followers, and still embraced by some Christians today. This absurd doctrine (though really no
more absurd than any other of the great number of specific varieties of Christianity) is usually said
to consist of five main points (summarized by the acronym ‘TULIP’ from the first letter of each): 1)
Total depravity: that human beings are totally depraved and completely corrupted by “sin”; 2)
Unconditional election: Since people can’t change on their own, God has merely chosen some of them to
be “saved” (i.e., go to heaven) without regard to their behavior or character; 3) Limited atonement:
Only God’s “chosen” can (with His help) atone for their sins; 4) Irresistible grace: You can’t thwart
God’s effort to save you if that is what he has decided to do; and 5) Perseverance of the saints: The
supposed “guarantee” that once God has saved you, you’ll remain saved no matter what. The main theme
in all this is that God has already determined what is going to happen, and therefore human beings
have no choice in the matter. This is a good example of the sorts of additional ridiculous conclusions
that religious people always arrive at!
CAMBODIA
See: POL POT REGIME
CAMUS, Albert [Pronounced (roughly): al-bear ka-MOO] (1913-1960)
French writer associated with existentialism, whose most
famous book was L’Etranger [The Stranger, or The Outsider] (1942). Although
active in the French resistance during the Nazi occupation, a member for a while of the revisionist
Communist Party of France, and co-editor with Sartre of a “left”-wing
newspaper for a few years after World War II, he was never a genuine Marxist revolutionary. In
1948 he broke with “left” political writing, and focused more exclusively on promoting his decadent
philosophy that “absurd humanity exists in an absurd world”. He received considerable applause from
the bourgeoisie for his anti-Communist writing, such as his book L’Homme Révolté
[The Rebel] (1951). He also supported French imperialism in its efforts to maintain control
of Algeria (where he as born) and other colonies. Nevertheless, Camus remains a favorite author in
bourgeois academia. He received the Nobel Prize for literature in 1957.
CAPACITY UTILIZATION RATE
The proportion of a company’s, an industry’s, or the entire economy’s productive capacity
that is actually being used at the given time. If 20% of the factories, mines, etc., in a country
are completely closed down, while the other 80% are being used at full capacity, that would be an
overall 80% capacity utilization rate. If all factories and mines are running, but with short hours
or minus one or more work shifts, so that they collectively produce only 80% of what they really
could, that is also an 80% capacity utilization rate. A high capacity utilization rate encourages
the capitalists to build more factories and is characteristic of a strong economy, whereas a low
capacity utilization rate makes the capitalists reluctant to expand production, leads them to
focus more on cutting costs to boost sales, etc., and is a sign of a weak economy (or one in
recession).
Obviously the capacity utilization rate depends
on standards for what full capacity is understood to mean. Since the fundamental
contradiction of capitalist production leads to the continual construction of new capacity that
is not really needed, if the standards for what is considered to be operating at “full capacity”
remained the same, the capacity utilization rate would drastically fall over time (though there
would be smaller ups and downs within that overall trend). To hide this (and fool everyone,
including themselves), from time to time the capitalists and their government lower the standards.
Thus if at one time the definition for full capacity meant that factories operated around the
clock with three shifts, but because of the increase in the number of factories, the usual
situation is for most factories to have just one or two shifts, the standard for “full capacity”
for the economy as a whole might be adjusted to say 1.5 shifts on average. In that case what the
government counts as an 80% utilization rate might actually be only a 40% utilization rate
on the older definition!
The U.S. capacity utilization figures are available
on a monthly basis from the Federal Reserve website at:
http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/G17/default.htm
“The history of war production [in World War II] thus demonstrates with crystal clarity that, as far as real capital is concerned, talk about a capital shortage is sheer nonsense. Not only does the United States economy have the latent ability to generate an enormous amount of new capacity, but it can fabricate a great deal more with just the existing capacity. If the standards for getting more production used during the Second World War were applied today [early 1976], we would probably find that only 50%, or maybe less, of existing manufacturing capacity is being used—instead of the official 75-percent figure based on current operating practices.” —Paul Sweezy & Harry Magdoff, “Capital Shortage: Fact and Fancy”, Monthly Review, April 1976. [By December 1976, that 75% utilization rate had fallen further to 73%. But that month the Federal Reserve succumbed to mounting pressure from the “business community” and other government agencies and revised their statistical series drastically upward again. What had been called a 73% utilization level was suddenly said to be 81%! (See: Business Week, Aug. 2, 1976, p. 16, and Dec. 13, 1976, p. 16.) This further amplified the point being made by Sweezy & Magdoff! —S.H.]
“According to a Fed [Federal Reserve] report on Apr. 15 [2009], one-third of manufacturing’s productive capacity is going unused, the biggest share on record back to 1948.” —Peter Coy, “What Good are Economists Anyway?”, Business Week (April 27, 2009), p. 31. [The official U.S. capacity utilization rate for manufacturing in April 2009 was 65.6%. The preliminary rate for manufacturing for June 2009 fell further to just 64.6%, and for industry as a whole stood at just 68.0%. And again, keep in mind that these capacity utilization figures—as low as they are—are still more grossly exaggerated today than ever before! My guess is that at present the true capacity utilization rate is probably only about 35% by any reasonable standard. —S.H.]
CAPITAL
1. [Formal bourgeois economics term:] Assets
minus liabilities; the market value of what a firm owns minus what it owes.
2. [Marxist term:] In modern bourgeois society
most people think of capital as the same thing as money, and this is the way the
bourgeoisie itself often informally uses the term. (“The company has enough capital on hand to
build a new factory...”) But for Marxists this completely misses the central concept of what
capital actually is. According to Marx capital is the wealth (including not only money, but—more
essentially—also land, buildings, machinery and hired labor) that is devoted to the production
of more wealth. The capitalist hires workers, who make practical use of that existing
capital (factories, machines, raw materials, etc.) to create additional value
(surplus value) which then automatically belongs to the
capitalist. This retained surplus value becomes part of the expanded capital that the capitalist
then owns.
If an ordinary person, a worker, has some money
saved up, or still available at the end of the month, that is not “capital”! (At
least in the Marxist sense.) The reason is that the worker has no way of making use of that
money to create more value, more capital. The worker does not own a factory, machinery, the
necessary raw materials, etc., that would allow him to do that. On the other hand, even if a
capitalist is deeply in debt, and needs to borrow more money to keep functioning, if he already
owns a factory, machinery, raw materials, and purchases labor power (i.e., hires workers) he
already has a tremendous amount of capital, and is in a position to make use of it to generate
additional capital.
Money can be used as capital (e.g., to
build factories, buy machinery and raw materials, hire workers, etc.). Money which is actually
used for such purposes is called money capital. But if money, whether a small amount or a
large amount, is not used for such purposes, it is not capital. Thus to understand
what capital actually is, it is first necessary to get rid of the simple-minded and grossly
incorrect idea that “capital = money”.
[A more precise, but more technical, definition:]
Capital is self-expanding value, or a value which generates
surplus value (and hence more capital) as the result of
exploitation of wage labor. Capital expresses the socioeconomic
relations of production between the two principal
classes in capitalist society—the capitalists (or bourgeoisie)
and the workers (proletariat).
See also sub-topics below, and especially
CAPITAL—As a Relationship between
People
“Capital is dead labour, that, vampire-like, only lives by sucking living labour, and lives the more, the more labour it sucks.” —Marx, Capital, Vol. I, ch. 10, sect 1. (Penguin ed., p. 342.) [The idea being expressed here is that the capitalists, through their ownership of capital which came from the previous exploitation of workers, are thereby in a position to further exploit workers.]
CAPITAL (DAS KAPITAL) [The Book by Marx]
[To be added... ]
“Capital [is] the greatest work on political economy of our age.” —Lenin, “Frederick Engels” (1896), LCW 2:25.
CAPITAL (DAS KAPITAL) — Engels Editorship Of
“Marx died before he could put the final touches to his vast work on capital. The draft, however, was already finished, and after the death of his friend, Engels undertook the onerous task of preparing and publishing the second and the third volumes of Capital. He published Volume II in 1885 and Volume III in 1894 (his death prevented the preparation of Volume IV). These two volumes entailed a vast amount of labor. Adler, the Austrian Social-Democrat, has rightly remarked that by publishing volumes II and III of Capital Engels erected a majestic monument to the genius who had been his friend, a monument on which, without intending it, he indelibly carved his own name. Indeed, these two volumes of Capital are the work of two men: Marx and Engels.” —Lenin, “Frederick Engels” (1896), LCW 2:25-26.
CAPITAL ACCOUNT BALANCE
See: BALANCE OF PAYMENTS
CAPITAL — Accumulation Of
Conversion of surplus value into capital. As capitalism
develops there is a generally steady increase in the amount and rate of expansion of surplus
value which goes into accumulation. Major interruptions occur in the process in the form of
overproduction crises.
CAPITAL — As a Relationship between People
“... capital is a certain relation between people, a relation
which remains the same whether the categories under comparison are at a higher or a
lower level of development. Bourgeois economists have never been able to understand
this; they have always objected to such a definition of capital.
“To regard the categories of the
bourgeois regime as eternal and natural is most typical of bourgeois philosophers. That
is why, for capital, too, they adopt such definitions as, for example, accumulated
labor that serves for further production—that is, describe it as an eternal category
of human society, thereby obscuring that specific, historically definite economic
formation in which this ‘accumulated labor,’ organized by commodity economy, falls
into the hands of those who do not work and serves for the exploitation of the labor
of others. That is why, instead of an analysis and study of a definite system of
production relations, they give us a series of banalities applicable to any system,
mixed with the sentimental pap of petty-bourgeois morality.” —Lenin, “What the
‘Friends of the People’ Are” (1894), LCW 1:217.
CAPITAL BROADENING vs. CAPITAL DEEPING
These are terms sometimes encountered in discussions of contemporary capitalism in China and
other rising capitalist economies. Capital broadening means employing more capital
(such as by building more factories) in order to hire more workers. Often these new workers
are from the countryside and were formerly peasants. Capital deepening means adding
more capital (such as by employing more sophisticated and expensive machinery) for the use
of existing workers, and in order to increase their productivity.
CAPITAL — Constant
See: CONSTANT CAPITAL
CAPITAL-LABOR RATIO [Contemporary Bourgeois Economics]
The total capital invested (in an economy, sector or individual company) divided by the
total hours worked by the labor force over a standard period of time (usually annually) and
generally expressed as a percentage. If this ratio rises it tends to indicate that the
capitalists are spending an increasing proportion of their investments on machinery rather
than hiring workers. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in the period from 1990
to 2008 the overall capital-labor ratio for the U.S. (including outlays for factories and
other buildings) increased by 29%. This
is obviously just another way of talking about the rising productivity of labor, and the
fact that over time fewer workers are needed to accomplish the same amount of work. The BLS
reports that the capital-labor ratio in just the information processing sphere (computers)
rose by a massive 310% from 1990 to 2010. This explains the rapidly falling need for
clerical, computing and many other “white-collar” workers.
This capital-labor ratio is a concept
that is somewhat similar to (but not actually the same thing as) Marx’s concept of the
organic composition of capital.
CAPITAL — Latent
See: LATENT CAPITAL
CAPITAL — Productive
See: PRODUCTIVE CAPITAL
CAPITAL — Variable
See: VARIABLE CAPITAL
CAPITALISM
A socio-economic formation based on the
ownership of the means of production by the capitalist class (either in its traditional
form of private ownership by individuals or corporations, or in the form of
state capitalism where the capitalists own the means of
production collectively as a class), and the exploitation of hired labor by the
capitalists through the extraction of surplus value.
“[T]he essence of capitalism is the appropriation by individuals of the product of social labor organized by commodity economy...” —Lenin, “What the ‘Friends of the People’ are” (1894), LCW 1:218.
CAPITALISM — Expand or Die
“Accumulation, or production on an expanded scale, which first appears as a means towards the constantly extended production of surplus-value, hence the enrichment of the capitalist, as the personal end of the latter, and is part of the general tendency of capitalist production, becomes in the course of its development, as was shown in the first volume, a necessity for each individual capitalist. The constant enlargement of his capital becomes a condition for its preservation.” —Marx, Capital, vol. 2, ch. 2, sect. 2; Penguin ed. p. 159.
CAPITALISM — Fundamental Contradiction Of
See: FUNDAMENTAL
CONTRADICTION OF CAPITALISM
CAPITALISM — as an International System
[Intro to be added...]
“The capitalist system is essentially an international system. If it cannot function internationally, it will break down.” —Henry Grady, an economist in the Roosevelt Administration during World War II. Quoted in Lloyd Gardner, et al., The Creation of the American Empire (1976), p. 508.
CAPITALISM — and Morality
See: MORALITY—and Capitalism
CAPITALISME SAUVAGE
The French phrase le capitalisme sauvage refers to American-style capitalism which is
viewed as being more “savage” than that in Europe. Aspects of this American savagery include
things such as the much inferior “safety net” for unemployed or injured workers in the U.S.,
the pathetically weak public health and welfare systems, etc., as well as the comparative
recklessness and arrogance with which American capitalists speculate and operate, including
internationally. It is certainly true that some capitalist socioeconomic varieties are more
savage than others, with the Nazi fascist regime perhaps being the worst of all time. And yet,
the French term falsely implies that capitalism is somehow civilized and acceptable in
contemporary Europe, which is total nonsense. All forms of capitalism are horrible, even the
“best” of them.
CAPITALIST ECONOMIC BOOM
A usually relatively short period, following a recession or depression, when capitalist
economic activity (such as the growth of GDP, the construction of
new factories and the hiring of a lot of new workers) expands rapidly. The bigger and
more serious the previous economic crisis, the more potential there is for a powerful boom
after it. However, because of the inherent internal contradictions of capitalism all such
booms come to an end in the form of a new crisis of
overproduction.
The workers are not (and cannot possibly be)
paid enough in their wages to buy all the products they produce. For a while the boom can be
kept going by extending credit to the workers and others to buy what they could not otherwise
afford, and by the construction of many new factories by the capitalists to produce the goods
being sold on credit. Thus capitalist booms are really only possible because of ever-increasing
debt and the ever-greater expansion of real productive capital itself. But, inevitably, there
will be a financial crisis, and this overproduction of capital will be exposed. This will in
turn lead to a contraction of real economic activity as well, in the form of mass layoffs,
factory closings, and bankruptsies of capitalist enterprises: In other words, the boom will
inevitably turn into its opposite, a serious new economic crisis.
As time goes on, and with the further
development of technology and more sophisticated methods of production, capitalist production
becomes more and more powerful. Moreover, with the growth of giant monopolistic (or
oligopolistic) corporations, companies become able to survive
longer even when there are economic downturns. For reasons such as these it gets continually
more difficult for capitalist economic crises to clear the ground for new booms. This in turn
means that booms become ever weaker and shorter.
There was one major exception to this in the
mid-twentieth century, the Post-World War II
Capitalist Boom, which was only possible because of the enormous destruction of real
capital on a world scale during that horrendous war. But even this sort of “clearing the
ground for a major new boom” through a major world war is probably no longer possible: A new
world war today of that magnitude, and with modern weapons of mass destruction, would likely
wipe out humanity entirely. For this reason, there will probably never be another
major world capitalist economic boom on the scale of the one after World War II.
See also:
BOOM QUARTERS
CAPITALIST IMPERIALISM
One of several names used for the form capitalism has taken during the imperialist era (from
the late 19th century on). Also known as “monopoly
capitalism” or just plain IMPERIALISM.
CAPITALIST ROADER
A term which originated in Maoist China for those individuals who sought to develop China’s
economy through the use of capitalism or capitalist methods. One of the earliest usages of
the term was on January 14, 1965, in the Central Committee document, “Some Current Problems
Raised in the Socialist Education Movement in the Rural Areas” (known as the Twenty-three
Points): “The crux of the current movement is to purge capitalist roaders in authority within
the Party.” And in the much larger and longer Great Proletarian Cultural
Revolution the capitalist roaders were also the primary target.
Initially this term capitalist roader
may sound sort of childish to Western ears, and bourgeois Sinologists have belittled it and
even remarked that “the concept was an exceedingly primitive political artifice”.
However, it is actually a quite sophisticated and important political concept. The term
revisionist, for example, which means someone who tries to
revise the revolutionary essence out of Marxism, is rather vague. In what way,
precisely, is Marxism being illicitly revised? A capitalist roader is the specific
type of revisionist who claims they are seeking to develop a socialist country after a
proletarian seizure of power, but through the means of capitalism or at least via capitalist
methods.
One excuse that capitalist roaders use is their
belief that only capitalism can develop a backward economy, or at least that capitalism is the
most effective way of doing so. Neither thing is actually true, as the Soviet Union proved
during its socialist era even while the capitalist world was in the midst of the Great
Depression, and as China itself proved during the Mao era. While the current capitalist ruling
class in China now claims that China’s economy was developing very slowly during the Mao
era, in the first years of their rule they actually published statistics showing that in the
last 17 years of the Mao era, during the extended Cultural Revolution period, the socialist
economy grew very rapidly.
More recent estimates place the annual rate of Chinese GDP growth during that period at over
10%. [See for example: Mobo Gao, “Debating the Cultural Revolution: Do We Only
Know What We Believe?”, Critical Asian Studies, vol. 34 (2002), pp. 424-425; and Maurice
Meisner, The Deng Xiaoping Era: 1978-1994, p. 189.]
Most capitalist roaders say that they “really
do” want to bring about socialism and then communism, but that the way to do this is first
through an extended period of capitalism. But as they institutionalize capitalist profits and
promote the exploitation of labor and the build up of huge family fortunes of a tiny few,
including by those in their own so-called “Communist Party” (which has many billionaire members
now!), that proclaimed goal of “someday” reaching communism through capitalism sounds ever more
hollow and ridiculous. They inevitably change from capitalist roaders into outright capitalist
exploiters who will never voluntarily agree to abandon capitalism.
“The handful of capitalist roaders in power in our party are the representatives of the bourgeoisie in our party.” —Mao, Nov. 6, 1967; SW 9:421.
“Without making excuses based on the objective conditions, the failure of the first wave of modern socialist states in keeping the working class in power has made it crystal clear that the growth and domination of capitalist roaders within ruling parties of the working class were the fundamental reasons for states under working class rule (i.e. the dictatorship of the proletariat) being transformed into their opposites. The capitalist roaders were those with authority under the state of working class rule who defended bureaucratic privileges, opposed supervision by the masses, and believed in capitalist logic for building socialism. By taking over the leadership of the ruling Party, these people were able to change the nature of the Party into one that serves the interest of the newly emerged capitalists, and turned the state into the instrument of their class rule.” —Fred Engst, “On the Relationship Between the Working Class and Its Party Under Socialism” (Feb. 15, 2015 version), p. 1 (Summary), online at: http://www.bannedthought.net/China/MaoEra/GPCR/Recent/OnRelationshipBetweenWorkingClassAndItsParty-Engst-150207.pdf
“The rise of capitalist roaders is an extraordinary challenge to the
traditional theory of the Party. As for defining who were the capitalist roaders, an
analysis of the history of 30 years before and after Deng Xiaoping (this outstanding
teacher by negative example) came to power in China can help us. The original definition
for the capitalist roaders was ‘those in the Party with authority taking the capitalist
road.’ However, a ‘capitalist road’ under a state of working class rule was not all that
clear. It now appears that the capitalist roaders were those people in the Party with
authority who applied capitalist logic in building socialism.
“For example, on the question of
which way forward for agriculture collective movement in the 1950’s, the three years of
difficulties from 1959-1961 were clearly caused by the ‘communist wind’ and the
‘exaggeration wind’ pushed by Liu Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping in 1958. But their proposed
solution in 1962 was to decollectivize! In industry, for example, it was obvious that
the problem with workers in some places who lacked enthusiasm for their work had to do
with their leaders who were divorced from the masses and had their noses in the air.
The solutions proposed by capitalist roaders, however, were to use material incentives
and to impose strict workplace discipline to force workers to toe the line!
“The reason for this line of
thinking among the capitalist roaders was because, deep down, in their bones, their
world outlooks were still capitalistic. They believed only in themselves, looked down
on the masses, acted as either saviors of the world or judged others by how they
themselves would behave. Instead of believing in the masses, relying upon the masses,
and mobilizing the masses, they mistrusted the masses, detached themselves from the
masses, and tried to manipulate them.” —Fred Engst, ibid., pp. 5-6. [This essay has
many additional useful comments about capitalist roaders and Mao’s struggle against
them. —Ed.]
CAPITALIST STATE — Partial Merger With Private Corporations
“The long-time tendency of business and government to become more intricately and deeply involved with each other has [now] reached a new point of explicitness. The two cannot now be seen clearly as two distinct worlds.” —C. Wright Mills, The Power Elite (1956).
CAPITALIZATION [Capitalist Finance]
1. The issuance of securities (bonds, shares of stock, etc.) in return for investment capital.
2. The calculation of the current lump sum value of a future stream of regular income or cash
flow based on the equivalent financial capital it would require to achieve that income at
current interest rates.
See also:
FICTITIOUS CAPITAL,
STOCK MARKET CAPITALIZATION
CARBON MONOXIDE POLLUTION
Carbon monoxide is an odorless, colorless gas which is very poisonous. It is released by
combustion of fossil fuels when inadequate oxygen is present, often by the burning of coal.
As the map at the right shows, the worst levels of carbon monoxide pollution in the world at
the present time are in China, especially in the region from Beijing to Shanghai. Capitalists,
especially in contemporary China, generally put profits ahead of the welfare of the people.
CARNAP, Rudolf (1891-1970)
Bourgeois empiricist philosopher of
logical positivism associated with the
Vienna Circle. Politically, he was a
social-democrat, at least until he moved to the
United States. Carnap had some utopian impulses, such as an enthusiasm for Esperanto. And
he was a philosophical idealist in more than just his empiricism; he was also enthusiastic
about parapsychology, for example.
CARNOT, Nicolas Leonhard Sadi (1796-1832)
French physicist and engineer, one of the founders of the science of thermodynamics. He made
many important basic discoveries concerning the nature of heat and energy, and its various
transformations.
CARRY TRADE [Capitalist Financial Speculation]
The sphere of financial activity where a speculator borrows money in one financial market where
interest rates are low, and then loans out the funds in another market where interest rates are
higher. This is most commonly done across international borders, by borrowing money in a country
where the interest rates are low (such as Japan in recent decades), exchanging the borrowed
currency for a different one (such as U.S. dollars), which he can then lend out at a higher
interest rate in a different country. While this may seem to be a fullproof way to “get rich”,
there are a variety of risks involved, such as the possibility that the exchange rate between the
two currencies will change in an unfavorable direction for the speculator thus wiping out his
gains and even part of his initial investment.
CARTESIAN MATERIALISM
The word “Cartesian” refers to the French philosopher René
Descartes (whose name in Latin is Cartesius), and to his followers. So “Cartesian
materialism” refers to the partially materialist views of Descartes and his followers. Descartes
was actually a dualist who thought that humans were made up of both
a material component and a totally independent mental/spiritual component (which “somehow” connected
up in the pineal gland in the brain!). However, he approached the description and explanation of the
functioning of the human body (as well as those of other animals) in an entirely
mechanical materialist way. This led to the general
promotion of materialist conceptions in science and philosophy even though Descartes himself was
not actually a true materialist.
CASINO CAPITALISM
[To be added...]
See also:
SPECULATION
“Speculators may do no harm as bubbles on a steady stream of enterprise. But the position is serious when enterprise becomes the bubble on a whirlpool of speculation. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done.” —John Maynard Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (Harcourt Brace: 1964 (1936)), Chapter 12, p. 159.
CASTES (India)
The religious/feudal division of the population into hierachical groups (castes and sub-castes)
with the higher castes having the most advantages and privileges, and the lower castes being
oppressed and discriminated against in many ways. Traditionally, and to a large extent still
today, people are restricted in the occupations they may engage in, who they can marry, and so
forth, on the basis of the caste they are born into. Although this ancient caste structure has
weakened somewhat as India and the other countries of South Asia become more modernized (i.e.,
especially in the cities), it is still a very serious problem in the region and strong evidence
that feudalism and feudal ideas remain strong there.
The caste system is associated with the Hindu
religion especially. The highest and most privileged caste is the Brahmins, who dominate many
professions. The lowest caste, now called the Dalits (formerly known
as the “Untouchables” or “Scheduled Castes”) are the poorest and least educated. However, the
Adivasis (or “tribals”) may be even worse off. Each year there are
still many hundreds of “honor killings” in India in which families avenge inter-caste marriages
and liaisons. It will almost certainly take a real social revolution in India to totally
eliminate the reactionary caste system.
Caste Structure in Bihar This is the caste structure in the state of Bihar, which is similar to (but not exactly the same as) the rest of India: | |
“Upper” (or “Forward”) Castes Brahmin Bhumihar Rajput Kayasth |
12.7% 4.6% 2.8% 4.2% 1.2% |
“Upper Backward” Castes Bania Yadav Kurmi Koiri |
18.8% 0.6% 10.7% 3.5% 4.0% |
“Lower Backward” Castes | 15.6% |
“Other Shudra” | 15.6% |
Total for "Backward” Castes | 50.0% |
Muslim | 12.2% |
Bengali | 2.4% |
“Scheduled Castes” (Dalits) [“Untouchables”] Includes: Ravidas, Dusadh, and Musahar) |
13.8% |
“Scheduled Tribes” [Adivasis] | 8.9% |
[Source: Prakash Louis, People Power: The Naxalite Movement in Central Bihar, (Delhi: Wordsmiths, 2002), p. 82.] |
CATEGORIES
[In Marxist philosophy:] The most general notions or concepts reflecting the
basic and essential properties and uniformities of the phenomena of nature, society
and thought, such as matter, motion, time, space, consciousness, contradiction,
necessity, chance, quality, quantity, capital, exploitation, etc.
“Man is confronted with a web of natural phenomena. Instinctive man, the savage, does not distinguish himself from nature. Conscious man does distinguish, categories are stages of distinguishing, i.e., of cognizing the world, focal points in the web, which assist in cognizing and mastering it.” —Lenin, “Conspectus of Hegel’s Book Science of Logic” (1914), LCW 38:93.
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE
[In Kant’s ethics:] A moral maxim which is unconditionally
binding and which everyone must wish to become a universal law. As against this, first, in
class society different classes have different ethical viewpoints, so “everyone” cannot
possibly agree on moral maxims and their precise interpretations. Secondly, the complexity
and dialectical nature of the world and society precludes virtually any moral maxim from
being valid in all possible situations. (Despite what Kant foolishly thought,
lying is not always wrong!) And third, the categorical
imperative principle has the absurd effect of making some innocuous actions immoral. (It
would be immoral to become a shoemaker, for example, because “if everybody did it” there
would be no farmers and we would all starve to death!)
CATHOLIC CHURCH
See: ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH
CATO INSTITUTE
See: THINK TANK
CATTY
See: JIN
CAUSES [Philosophy]
[To be added...]
See also below and:
FINAL CAUSE
CAUSE AND EFFECT
There are causes and effects in the world because the world is in motion, or because
it is changing and developing. Many (all?) changes lead to other changes, though of greater
or lesser significance, and the ones they lead to are called the effects, while the
changes that lead to these effects are called the causes. The causes themselves were
the effect of previous causes, and the effects themselves cause further effects. The world
continues to change.
Despite such endless chains of causes and
effects, there must be a certain sort of dialectical unity
to the world for causes and effects to exist. The world must consist of things which are
connected, but not completely so; there must be both interconnection and separateness or
differentiation. The artificial intelligence researcher Marvin Minsky once noted that “There
can’t be any ‘causes’ in a world in which everything that happens depends more or less
equally upon everything else that happens.... To know the cause of a phenomenon is to know,
at least in principle, how to change or control some aspects of some entities without
affecting all the rest.” [Society of Mind (1986), p. 129.]
For us Marxist revolutionaries, the goal is
to scientifically determine which things in the world that we can change which will
serve as causes to eventually bring about the social effects we desire—namely, the end of
capitalism and its replacement by communism.
[More to be added...]
See also:
Philosophical
doggerel on the topic.
CBB
An abbreviation commonly used by revolutionaries in India to refer to the “Comprador
Bureaucratic Bourgeoisie”, or in otherwords, the ruling class in India which is made up
of a mixture of comprador capitalists and big bureaucrat capitalists.
CDO
See: COLLATERALIZED DEBT
OBLIGATION
Dictionary Home Page and Letter Index