/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.20991853]

Is Schumpeter a social democrat?

[Anonymous No.20991916]

Sociologists tend to be whatever they think is inevitable.

[Anonymous No.20992981]

>>20991853
Why would you think that? Because he thought large bureaucratic structures were functional? Schumpeter was pretty obviously deep in the reactionary anal nihilist tendencies. He didn't care about workers and thought plebs were expendable in the process of development

[Anonymous No.20993645]

>>20991853
No

[Anonymous No.20993713]

>muh development
Development towards what?
Has anyone ever tried imagining a world where the europeans weren't obsessed with spice on ideological grounds?

[Anonymous No.20994036]

he was a little bit of a nazi.

[Anonymous No.20994107]

>>20994036
I have been reading papers on the subject, so I think I should share some info. What you’ll find is that libertarians desperately want to underplay Schumpeter’s sympathies with nazi ideology. It makes sense, because it would be uncomfortable that one of the greatest champions of free markets was actually deeply antisemitic and sympathetic to Nazi Germany. To find out the truth of his politics, you have to look at what has been written on his personal diaries. See, for example, Bernard Semmel’s article, “Schumpeter’s Curious Politics”.

> Schumpeter believed not that Jews were inferior, but rather that their racial superiority led to their being "early bloomers" who "unfairly" secured "more rewards than they deserve in free competition." This, at any rate, is what he told the young Paul Samuelson, perhaps his best student, and a future Nobel Laureate in economics. In the usual mode of anti-Semitism, he saw the Jews as clannish, even racist, and referred to them as "Hebes" or "Asians." In the mid 1930s, he observed that the Nazis had a "point" in denying that all races were equal. Their error was in not seeing that the Jews were the true "master race." "What is the greatest achievement of our civihzation?" he asked. "Modern capitalism! Which race has made perhaps the largest contribution to that achievement? The Jews!"

> The war-crimes trials made him unhappy because of their reliance on retroactive criminal laws. Although he denounced the Holocaust, he saw it as connected to the German war effort, though he did not explain how. He denied—in the manner of recent revisionists—that six million Jews had been killed. Probably only two million had perished, which for him somehow lessened the crime. He didn't like "Jewish philosophers[,] for theirs is a Jewish philosophy," adding that "racial creed is the Jewish creed," and he worried about the political influence of the "New York Jews." Even as he deplored racism on the part of the Jews, he praised a eugenic science that would seek to improve racial stock. "We could solve all the problems of this country," he declared, "if we hniited citizenship to people whose parents were born here ... even better, whose grandparents were born here." Now and then some uncertainties on the matter appeared, as when he asked "Am I losing my faith in race?"

[Anonymous No.20994122]

>>20994107
> In 1931 and 1932, Schumpeter advised some of his students to join the Nazi party to offer it sound advice on economic matters, and at the same time further their careers. In a farewell speech at Bonn in 1932, he declared that the Nazi party was "like a monster of infinite impulse," capable of producing "either catastrophe or glory" for the German people. He urged his students to "orient" themselves to parties with "non-rational programs" since these had the greatest possibility of success.

> Before leaving for Harvard, he confided to his diary that he "had to leave" Germany because "everyone who is close to me and with whom I could work stand on one side"—in opposition to Hitler. "And what I feel in my innermost self is around Hitler."

[Anonymous No.20994214]

>>20994107
>>20994122

Based Schumpeter.

[Anonymous No.20994227]

>>20991853
Most of what I got out of him was that innovation creates new jobs and destroys others

[Anonymous No.20994229]

>>20994122
>"everyone who is close to me and with whom I could work stand on one side"—in opposition to Hitler. "And what I feel in my innermost self is around Hitler."
Literally me.

[Anonymous No.20994261]

>>20993713
>Has anyone ever tried imagining a world where the europeans weren't obsessed with spice on ideological grounds?
It's called Africa.

[Anonymous No.20994395]

>>20991853
No

[Anonymous No.20996251]

>>20991853
>it will probably be something along the lines of Schumpeter's 'Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy' and Burnham's 'Managerial Revolution'—a boring slide into a semi-corporatist structure of state-sponsored oligopolies and state bureaucracies. The progression of information technologies will, instead of serving as a tool for greater individual freedom, 'stereotype' life through the process of increasing digitisation (as digitisation requires the transformation of information into standardised forms). Individual's lives will likewise become increasingly deracinated as more formative experiences and socialisation occurs online; friendships, association, and identities will become discontiguous and disaggregated. At the same time, the digitisation of life along with progressions in information processing technologies will give states and firms greater management over 'human resources'. While information technologies will make communication easier, the deracination of social bonds will make it more difficult to mobalise in any given geographic location, leaving individuals dispersed bonds organisationally outmanoeuvred by concentrated institutional power. And while digitisation will also make power-resources more mobile, these resources will be increasingly vulnerable to censorship or seizure due to their stereotyped nature, and more concentrated in the elite than the masses. In essence, civil society will thin out, the civil service will become the main governing body, elections will still occur but they will be less important, the market will become dominated by a few massive companies subsisting off government contracts, the power of the masses will decrease relative to the power of the elite. State management of society will be subtle and algorithmic, life will be more homogeneous, meaningful resistance will become more difficult. Think a mixture of the EU and China.
Things wont be dystopian, they will just be boring.

[Anonymous No.20996437]

>>20996251
Didn't know this was copy pasta, very good

[Anonymous No.20997190]

>>20994036
Wasn't he Jewish?

[Anonymous No.20997536]

>>20994227
That's all? Schumpeter is full of insights

[Anonymous No.20997541]

>>20997190
why cause he "looks" Jewish? Grow up anon. His family was Catholic

[Anonymous No.20997963]

>>20991853
Why do you care about his political leanings?

[Anonymous No.20998268]

>>20994229
Fucking LMAO

[Anonymous No.20998310]

>>20994107
>>20994122
Cut a liberal...

[Anonymous No.20998927]

>>20996251
totally correct and based. modern life is a boring purgatory, not a chaotic hellscape like everyone wants to pretend.

[Anonymous No.20999539]

>>20994036
AAAHHH, NOT ANOTHER ONE

[Anonymous No.20999876]

>>20994122
>>20994107
Amazing, thanks for sharing this. The viability of national socialism keeps fascinating me.

[Anonymous No.20999885]

>>20996251
Very good and on point. The very boringness is why it's so insidious. It attacks by putting its prey to sleep first.

[Anonymous No.20999938]

>>20994107
>"racial creed is the Jewish creed"
This was the standard position liberals had on the JQ until it was "refuted" by the "you just can't think things like that anymore because of mustache painter man" "argument". Calling out clannishness in an era of individualist ubercapitalism and "rescuing people from their origins" has always fascinated me as a concept though I disagree with it