User:Equi/sources

Libéralisme autoritaire

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Barth%C3%A9l%C3%A9my

Barthélémy a été le libéral le plus engagé avec le régime de Vichy, mais non le seul : Pierre-Étienne Flandin, Jacques Bardoux, Lucien Romier ou encore Émile Mireaux, compagnons de Barthélémy au Temps ou à l'Alliance démocratique, ont eux aussi exercé des responsabilités à Vichy.

http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/1997/02/CHUNG/7807.html http://doc-iep.univ-lyon2.fr/Ressources/Bases/Fripes/article.html?ID=40345 http://doc-iep.univ-lyon2.fr/Ressources/Bases/Fripes/article.html?ID=717 http://doc-iep.univ-lyon2.fr/Ressources/Bases/Fripes/article.html?ID=42418 http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/2000/08/MARCOS/14136.html http://partitions.levillage.org/breve.php3?id_breve=81 http://www.alire.com/Romans/BiendesautresExtrait.html

• "L’article de Marcuse intitulé « Le libéralisme dans la conception totalitaire de l’Etat » établit un lien dialectique selon lequel le totalitarisme continue le libéralisme, et y réagit par l’héroïsme et la célébration de la nature. Dans « L’Etat autoritaire » (1942), Horkheimer met en évidence le passage, qui fait advenir à partir du libéralisme un nouvel ordre économique, social et politique, l’étatisme intégral, qui désigne le capitalisme d’Etat mais aussi le socialisme d’Etat. La relation entre l’ordre libéral et ce nouvel ordre autoritaire (« Le capitalisme d’Etat est l’Etat autoritaire du présent ») est double et dialectique : l’ordre autoritaire émerge de tendances contenues dans l’ordre libéral, il en constitue un prolongement mais il s’oppose également à cet ordre. Un tel passage désigne l’avènement d’une forme nouvelle de domination où les médiations économiques à l’œuvre dans l’économie de marché, les médiations politiques et juridiques, sont abolies dans le capitalisme d’Etat. Horkheimer caractérise les tendances à l’étatisme intégral en termes de développement vers le monde administré. L’Etat autoritaire est une structure commune à deux figures historiques, le capitalisme de monopoles (le nazisme) et l’étatisme intégral (le stalinisme)." libéralisme et autoritarisme
• " Tel est la cas de l’étude de Tak-Wing Ngo (« Valeurs sociétales et politique consensuelle dans le Hong Kong colonial »). Pour lui, le régime politique de l’ancienne colonie est une sorte de libéralisme autoritaire (liberal authoritarianism) ou d’autoritarisme pluraliste (pluralistic authoritarianism). D’un côté « pas d’élection ou de suffrage universel jusqu’en 1982, pas de partis politiques jusque dans les années 1990 », de l’autre « aucun manque repérable en matière de défense des groupes d’intérêt, de mouvements sociaux ou de lobbying » (p. 131)." libéralisme autoritaire à Hong kong
• "Le libéralisme autoritaire croît aux valeurs du marché (mise en concurrence, recherche exclusive du profit) pour réguler l’économie, structurer la société et donner un idéal de vie aux individus. Il considère que ceux qui ne s’en sortent pas (entreprises, groupes sociaux, territoires, pays, individus) méritent leur condition, les règles du jeu étant (soi-disant) les mêmes pour tous." Le libéralisme autoritaire de N. Sarkozy.
• " L'étude de la version fasciste de l'idéologie bourgeoise est très instructive à cet égard. Dans son analyse de la philosophie politique qui accompagne, en Allemagne, la construction de l'État totalitaire, Marcuse démontre comment «des éléments fondamentaux (de cette philosophie) sont prélevés dans l'interprétation libérale, puis réinterprétés et développés en fonction des conditions économiques et sociales modifiées... les deux points de départ les plus importants que la nouvelle théorie de l'État et de la société trouve dans le libéralisme (étant) : l'interprétation naturaliste de la société et le rationalisme libéral débouchant sur l'irrationalisme» (Note 11). Dans la version fasciste du libéralisme, l'individu s'abolit dans le tout conçu comme «race», «peuple», «pensée nationale», «terre et sang», «communauté de destin» et incarné par l'État totalitaire qui devient «le représentant des possibilités propres de l'être-là » (Note 12). Y sont renversés les principes libéraux de la séparation de l'État et de la société, de la séparation et de la distinction entre la nature et l'économie ; la rationalité, la liberté, la responsabilité des individus se trouvent sublimés dans l'omnipotence et l'omniscience de l'État. Pourtant, comme le souligne Marcuse, « si l'État autoritaire total donne à son combat contre le libéralisme l'aspect d'une lutte entre « conceptions du monde », en laissant de côté la structure sociale fondamentale du libéralisme c'est parce qu'il est au fond largement d'accord avec cette structure de base... (qui) repose sur une organisation économique privée de la société » (Note 13)" "Classes et pouvoir. Les théories fonctionnalistes. (1978)" Nicole Laurin-Frenette
• "Marcuse had already argued in his 1934 essay, “The Struggle Against Liberalism in the Totalitarian View of the State,” that National Socialism had liquidated the liberal-democratic political principles of the Weimar republic, while at the same time consolidating the monopolistic forms of capital accumulation that had made great strides in Germany in the twenties. In “State and Individual under National Socialism” he makes a similar argument, although he places greater emphasis on the achievements of Weimar. In his view, the Nazi regime allowed German industry to cast off the fetters imposed upon it by the Weimar republic, and thus cleared the way for imperialist expansion in the East. He also focuses – clearly demonstrating the influence of Neumann’s Behemoth – on the abolition of the Weimar Rechtsstaat and the dissolution of universalist law, which placed German society under the direct control of particularistic groups, such as big industry, the Nazi party, and the Wehrmacht. In other words, Marcuse tried to convince his American audience that fascism was not the complete antithesis of their own society – it was not a monolithic state and it brought to fruition certain tendencies operative in all capitalist economies – while at the same time reminding them that the universalist political principles they were defending were far more than metaphysical abstractions." Review of : "Herbert Marcuse: Technology, War and Fascism"

Autonomie et hétéronomie

• autonomie
• Au-delà de l'hétéronomie
• [1]

abraham guillén

plan/idées économie

[2]

• The principles of libertarian economy were put into practice-- more by intuition than by design, without grand theories--by the libertarian collectives in Spain during the revolution of 1936-39.
• an economy inspired by federalist principles and self-managed, with a self-managed market, could work well and avoid the central - planning which always leads to the totalitarian, bureaucratic State, owner of each and everything.
• all the self-regulating objective economic laws, although the most important of these, the law of labor value, self-regulates the exchange of goods and services at their just value in order to fullfill the others: the law of economic equity; the law of cooperation, between the distinct integrated federations of the libertarian economy; the law of exchange equivalence. In a market liberated from the capitalists and the opprobrious tutelage of the State, they will self-regulate, almost cybernetically, the economic processes of production, exchange, distribution and consumption.
• In our epoch the exhaustion of statist politics emerges; so it is with the social-semocratic regimes under the control of the parasitical middle classes (in the west); so it is with the totalitarian bureaucracies of the one-Party and State-employer; whether under the parliamentary welfare-State (in the West), or the total State (in the East) and of failed nazi-fascism, the people have understood that they must organize themselves into industrial democracy (self-managed enterprises) and into federated self-government (direct democracy), overthrowing the economic power of the industrial, mercantile and financial bourgeoisie, and the political power of the radical, social-democratic, christian democratic, socialist and neo-liberal petty bourgeoisie who, with their various parties, take turns in Power
• Marxism and keynesianism have contributed equally to the development of statist economics ; so it is with the marxist-leninists and petty-bourgeois socialists; so it is with the technocrats and bureaucrats of every type, partisans of managed economies with the goal of controlling the national economies and the organs of the world economy, imperialist or hegemonist, like the IMF, the BIRF, the GATT, the U.N. Security Council, instruments of the "new world order" of ex-president Bush.
• there comes a moment in which the libertarian economy makes it scientifically possible as the best possible administration of economic matters creating thus the conditions to abolish the State, oppressor and exploiter of men, converting to decentralized self-government. In this manner an economic federalism (production of goods and service) and an administrative federalism: one, as the self-management of workplaces; the other, as local, regional and national self-government, creates a Self-power of direct participation of people organized in their own interest; not requiring, therefore, a political governing class, nor a bourgeoisie nor techno-bureaucracy, managing industry in order to usurp the economic surplus produced by the labor of others without paying, usurping by surplus-value for the bourgeoisie of the State-owner, now failing in Russia and China
• Accordingly as worker productivity increases, everyone working scientifically, it will be possible to attain very soon, a working day, half productive and half educational, with the goal of giving everyone equal time for labor and studies, equal scientific, technical and cultural preparation. In this way, all will be capable of doing all, and with the help of the computer revolution, to abolish the traditional division of labor, so that the revolution is not overcome by classes or social estates from dividing labor into manual or intellectual.
• the integral assimilation of the computer revolution in order to liberate (painful) manual labor from material production; since the automation of labor, plus self-management of social capital at the same time, will create all the technical, economic, cultural and scientific conditions to attain a harmonious society, without social conflicts nor economioc contradictions; then self-management plus automation equals libertarian communism.
• But prior to attaining the "golden age" of self-government, of eqaulity in education and social conditions for all, where each receives according to their needs and the economic possiblities of society, transcending social heirarchies and the antagonism between wage labor and private or State capital, it will be necessary to transcend political economy as a science of administration of scarce resources and distribution of goods and services according to quantity and quality of labor, abolishing at the same time the division of labor into professions or corporations, by virtue of which some consume more than others, using money and unequal incomes in order to perpetuate the inequality among people.
• In this order of ideas, libertarian communism, for humanity to attain an economy of abundance, a high productivity of automated labor will have to go beyond the law of exchange value, wages, money, merchandise, unequal incomes, the State in order to impose a unequal division by classes; the political parties and the ideologies peculiar to the political alienation of a competitive society, the division of labor between managers and subordinates
• The libertarian economy, initially, as happened in Spain during the Revolution of 1936-39, the "praxis" set itself problems that had to be the resolved, totally or partially, by bypassing political ideology, creating libertarian collectives, enterprises managed directly by workers without techno-bureaucratic directors; but having to demonstrate by means of self-organized labor that the forces of production would not be wasted. Seeing in practice the human, solidaric and productive labor advantages of the the libertarian collectives, the small private property owners associated with them voluntarily

[3]

• Now then, a libertarian economy of the self-managed type has to be capable of producing an economic surplus greater than under private or state capitalism; of converting a large part of this surplus to the reproduction of social capital, improving the productivity of labor. Therefore the workers will achieve a higher rate of growth in productive forces than private or state capitalism. There will be, thus, better and greater production with less expense of human effort and greater and better use of automated machinery. This is because only the automation of labor makes it possible to create the technical basis for libertarian communism.
• Without debureaucratization and debourgeoisfication there is no way out of the growing economic and social crisis which is caused by the excessive economic waste involved in the sterile consumption of the parasitic classes
• By means of centralized bureaucratic planning of their economies, all social capital, labor, national income and economic power is placed in the hands of a techno-bureaucracy of planning, for whom workers and their products are only ciphers in five-year plans. In this way they create social relations between those who have Power and those who suffer as wage workers not essentially different than those existing in the capitalist countries.
• In our epoch computer networks--if they are well programmed, if their memory is updated and constantly renewed, if they register all the fundamental data of a country, a society, an enterprise, a locality, district and region--are more efficient and cheaper for the management of the enterprise or society than the professional politicians or technocrats and bureaucrats of all types.
• In our school of thought, economic growth, the right of work for all, economic, cultural and technological progress, are developed with fewer obstacles in a libertarian society than in a society under the totalitarian dictatorship of large capitalist monopolies or the capitalism of the State. In both cases, given the great progress realized by our society, the dictatorships of private capital or State capital can be overcome. A self-managed society can be established with social ownership of the means of production and exchange, uniting capital, labor and technology without antagonism over classes or forms of property. This would create an egalitarian society in culture, economics and technology, thanks to an economy of abundance.
• It is possible to the give power of self-government to the local communities, districts, provinces and regions, by means of an economic federalism and self-administration which would be integrated into a Supreme Economic Council. This would not be a Gosplan as in the former USSR, but a co-government of things by means of federations of production and services. These federations would function democratically and be self-managed, with the goal of the total process having a law of harmony of development without economic crises of disproportionality between all the branches of production and services. In other words, they would function without relative crises of underproduction or overproduction as occurs, respectively, under State capitalism or private capitalism.
• it is necessary to have democracy and economic growth, with an increased productivity of labor. This would also require the full employment of the active population, along with the full participation of all in the decisions and the knowledge for this within reach of everyone. It is necessary to create a libertarian society, in which the elites of power and knowledge and social estates of every type, would be transcended in work, science, capital and technology, by means of effective self-management, the real participation of the people.
• It is necessary, therefore, to liberate oneself ideologically from parliamentary socialism, from totalitarian communism, from bourgeois democracy which is economic dictatorship, from corporatism of every type--and establishing in their place a democracy of association, self-managed and libertarian, where everyone would be equal in rights and responsibilities, with privileges for no one.
• The planning of economic, cultural and technological development must arise from the putting of social wealth in common [...] involves a program of harmonizing the proportion of growth of the branches of production and services with full participation from bottom to top, based on a libertarian and federative socialism.
• Emancipation can not be won individually but only collectively, although each may have free will. The realization of full liberty and personality for the worker requires a self-organized society without the need for State oppression, whether it is called right or left, bourgeois or bureaucratic, conservative or revolutionary. Without self-managed socialism, social property and self-government, all systems are the same.
• The salvation of humanity is collective and not individual, because the human is a social being, solidaric, with the aim of self-defense from other species since the paleolithic period
• It is the class division of humanity, in the wake of private property and the State, which makes possible the exploitation of man by man, of the proletarian by the proprietor.
• The human being, in reality, does not exist outside the society from which he/she has appeared as a free subject; but at the same time solidarity with others in daily life, at work, in education, in self-defense, particularly at the beginning of humanity, "mutual aid" was the basis of existence of man associated to man, even though under capitalism man is possessed by an appetite for wealth and the cult of the money-god.
• By means of this federalism based upon libertarian socialism, the economy, the natural and human resources, the balance of natural ecosystems, the full employment of available labor, the leisure and education time at all levels of knowledge, the social-economic and cultural life of locality, district, province, region, nation or the world, can be programmed with the participation of everyone in everything, without creating a great deal of confusion.
• A social-economic program, with continual popular participation (not indirectly through municipal, regional or national elections), must be by the means of federations in industry, agriculture, and services, integrated into a Federative Council of the Economy, in which all the federations producing goods and services must be represented. By way of example, this "Federative Council of the Economy" would have to integrate, among others, the following federations: Fruits and horticultural products; Cereals; Feed for livestock; Food industry, including imports; Hostelry and Tourism; Wine, beer, and alcoholic beverages; Oils and greases from vegetable and animals; Fishing: boats and canning; Textiles; Furs and leather; Timber and cork; Paper and graphic arts; Chemicals; Construction; Glass and ceramics; Metal machining; Steel; Non-ferrous minerals: metals and alloys; Energy: petroleum, coal, gas, electricity, and atomic energy; Information and the construction of computers, integrated micro-circuits, and semi-conductors; Electronics: numerical controlled machines; Biotechnology; Aero-space; Research and Development, uniting technology with work.

[4]

• A self-managed economy will have to rationally organize the branches of industry and, within each one, integrate the small and medium enterprises with the big enterprises to constitute a unified

whole.

• The self-managed economy will have to invest a good portion of the national income in the production of both consumer and capital goods, particularly in its first years of operation, so that the productivity of the labor is increased to unprecedented levels. In this order of ideas, economic growth, with libertarian socialism, would be greater than with private capitalism or State capitalism, since the surplus-value wasted on the parasitic classes under capitalism would be invested instead.
• By means of the application of information and of computer networks, well supplied with all types of data, the Federative Council of the Economy would have the actual information for each

branch of production or of services. Therefore, the economic integration of branches of production and of service would be a positive science, which would know everything necessary in order to avoid crisis of disproportional of growth in those branches, without the production of excesses of personal, of goods not sold, or of raw materials, since it would be known, at each moment, the amount necessary to produce, to distribute or invest so that the social economy has a law of harmonious development.

• For example, the central computers of the Federative Council of Economy, with informative contributions of the computer terminals in local factories, provincial and regional, would make known what was everyone's production, reserves and shipments to the self-managed market.
• In the case of the industry for manufacturing of paper containers, the central computer would register the number of establishments, the personnel employed in each one of them, total of work-hours, cost of the personnel in stable monetary units, electric power consumed in the process of production, value of the fuels and gas used, value of the consumed raw materials, general expenses, taxes, value of the total production, value of the employed labor, amounts destined to pay debts and for new investments. In sum: programming the economy would be simple, without need of bureaucrats, of capitalist managers or of technocrats.
• When we speak of taxes we don't refer to the tribute of the western capitalist type nor to the business taxes (mainly figured as a business expense usurped from the enterprises by the State in

the USSR and in the "popular republics that made up the COMECON), but to the delivery of a pre-determined quota of the economic surplus, extracted by the self-managed enterprises, transferred to the self-governments, responsible for returning those transfers to society in social and public services according to their ability: sanitation, hygiene, paving of streets, highways, roads, ports, railroads, education, public health and other responsibilities of the self-governments which would be too great to enumerate.

• In this case we would attempt to strengthen the economy of the free self-managed municipality, not in the traditionally Roman [state-citizen] nor modern bureaucratic sense, but as the social

and public enterprise of the citizens; as well as the industrial, agricultural, of research enterprise or certain global services which would constitute the task of the associated workers with their means of production, self-organized into Worker Councils of Self-Management and in Basic Units of Associated Labor, where the economic accounting should be automated by means of computers and take as their unit of calculation, the labor-hour (LH).

• It would have thus a monetary equivalence of the same value, if the money is intended to remain stable. The LH would circulate monetarily in the form of ticket which would give the right to consume reasonably, always leaving an important portion in order to invest more capital than wornout during a year, so that libertarian socialism would enlarge the social capital, with the goal of progressing more with self-management than under the dominance of capitalists or of

bureaucrats.

• Every project of investment would be calculated in hours of labor (LH), as well as in terms of personal and public consumption required.
• a part of the global economic surplus would be invested in achieving a greater automation of

industrial production and of agricultural production. It would thus be possible to continue reducing the working day to a range which would allow a more leisure time, so that all the citizens could occupy their time in more relaxation and, above all, in better scientific, cultural and technological preparation

• The LH, as labor-money and as a quantification of the economy, having a stable monetary value would program the economy: to account it; to establish the costs of the goods and services; programming the integrated branches of the division of the labor and correct disharmonies between them; quantifying in the products the cost of raw, energy, amortization of the capital, value of the work, economic contributions to the local self-governments and to the national co-government, etc. All of this would function within a libertarian socialism of a self-managed market, without speculators, hoarders or merchants, in order that competition benefit the workers and the consumers, the cooperative groups and self-managed enterprises, in the manner similar to the way the market functioned in the Spanish libertarian collectives during the Spanish Revolution of 1936-39.
• In a libertarian economy, labor-money wouldn't be money in the capitalist sense such as we understand it and need it today, since it wouldn't allow the individual accumulation of capital in order to exploit the labor of other people and obtain a surplus value.
• Rather it would be intended to facilitate the exchange of goods and service, in a self-managed market, where these exchange at their true labor value, so that it fulfill economically the law of equal exchange in equality of condition for all the integrated branches of the social division of the labor and the law of the cooperation of those same branches or federations of production and of service.
• If the LH, the unit of labor-money, would have, for example, an purchasing power of 1 hour of average social-labor and this were equivalent, roughly speaking, to one dollar, one could establish, among others, the following calculation of economic-accounts:
  • Calculation in (LH) of an Industrial Enterprise

- Costs of machinery = $1000 = 1000 LH

- Raw materials, energy, etc. = $50,000 = 50,000 LH

- Hours worked in production = 50,000 LH

- Total of LH = 101,000 LH

- Units produced during the period of work = 100

Dividing the total number of LH, spent in the process of production, and the total of units produced in that time of work which could be daily, monthly, or yearly, we would have an average of labor value for unit produced of 1.010 of LH or of labor-money.

• Now then, as no money could be absolutely stable, since if the productivity of the labor increases, due to improvements in machines, education of the workers and more efficient methods, it would result that the LH will end up having less value of exchange, increasing its value of use, driving this economic process toward an economy of abundance where, overcoming venal value, the value of use would only remain. Consequently, having reached this stage in the economy and technology, with most of the work automated, the value of the produced goods wouldn't be based much on living labor, but almost everything would be labor of the past (accumulated capital), which would determine thereby a self-regulated production of abundance. Then the wonderful time will have arrived of overcoming finally both money and the commodity, each man receiving according to his necessity, although he only contributes according to his unequal capacity, or in other words, that it would make possible the economic equality between the men: libertarian communism, rationally and scientifically, economically possible, without which it must considered as a beautiful utopia.
• Only a self-managed economy, rational and objective, based on scientific laws, from the commencement of the establishment of libertarian socialism, avoiding the fall into one phase or another, into either the socialism of group property, into forms of corporatism or of narrow syndicalism, but towards a condition of always placing the general interest above the particular interest of the professional or work groups
• -- The Libertarian Society

- Analyse économique est/ouest. capitalisme privée et capitalisme d'État (lili - coco), keynesianisme, etc - nécéssité d'organiser l'autogestion