Late stage capitalism is weird capitalism

pluralistic.net

23 points·doener··7 comments

Usually I complain about the terrible design of websites if I mention it at all. This one has a fantastic design, in my opinion. Easy to read, easy to navigate. It was all around a real pleasure to visit and read the article. I wish every site was like this.

Question: how does one recognize that a stage of capitalism is late? (Later or latest are simple.) How many years would capitalism have to chug along to invalidate any given description of a year's capitalism as "late stage"?

It's irrelevant really. "Late stage" is just a name, to contrast with earlier (e.g. robber barron) and 20th century stages.

Like "modernity" (which refers as a name to a historical period ending sometime before or after WWII, but also to the quality of being contemporary at any era), "late" in "late stage capitalism" refers to the present capitalism stage, and not to the temporal quality of being later (if capitalism exists in 2600 it wont be "later", in this sense, only in chronological sense).

Absolutely not. The origin of the term is people implying that we are in the late stages of capitalism (as in, it is on its way out).

You dont havr to agree with their premise but thats how the people who generally use the term define it.

Definition of terms question: what is the primary source for the term “late stage capitalism”?

It’s a term we bandy about, but I’d like to read the sorcerer where it is originally contextualized.

Let me google that for you. Aha:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_capitalism

"Writing about this for NY Magazine, Eric Levitz cites Matt Bruenig, who calls it "market socialism." Asset Manager Capitalism has delivered low prices while "rationally planning" not just a single industry, but all the industries."

That's interesting term.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com