Capitalism as a deliberative elite system and the general will

from The World and Japan 100 years from now How will the Internet change the world? Capitalism as a deliberative elite system and the general will

To be precise, Rousseau’s “the general will” is more of a “collective unconscious” than a “wisdom of crowds”. I think this is a very good theory of the general desire. The problem is that we have been very mistaken in thinking that this is the basis of democracy. That’s the problem, and I don’t think Rousseau and deliberation have anything to do with it at all. The French Revolution is generally regarded as a revolution based on high-minded ideas, but as you know, it was a huge setback project. Just when you think you have achieved a revolution, Robespierre comes along and restores the monarchy. What was that revolution all about? After all, democracy is a philosophy that has never done the right thing. What kind of political system do you think would be best? As Dr. Nakatani said in his lecture, I think that a system like the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) may be possible. In other words, in China, there is a “deliberative elite system” called the Communist Party, and outside of it, there is “rough capitalism” as the “general will. The elites do not simply follow the “general will,” but they make policy decisions while watching the trends of the “general will.

• careful deliberation Elite

This discussion addresses important themes in political philosophy and the history of ideas. It discusses the contrast and relevance of the “deliberative elite system” and “capitalism as the general will,” but this contrast is also deeply connected to thinkers of the past. Below we examine this discussion through several related thinkers and concepts.

Rousseau and the General Will

• First, Rousseau’s “general will” (volonté générale) is considered to be closer to the “collective unconscious” than to “collective knowledge”. This is the will that represents the interests of the community as a whole, rather than the sum of individual desires or selfish wills. Rousseau considered this the foundation of democracy, but how it works in actual politics has always been debatable.

Plato’s Philosopher Politics

• For a system that emphasizes deliberation by the elite, one is reminded of Plato’s “philosopher’s politics. Plato believed that the ideal is for a state to be governed by philosophers who possess wisdom and virtue. This was to prevent the desires and ignorance of the general public from leading politics in the wrong direction, and can be seen as one model for a “deliberative elite system.

• Tocqueville and the Anxiety of Democracy

  • Alexis de Tocqueville also pointed out that while democracy brings equality and freedom, it also entails the danger of loss of individual subjectivity and the “tyranny of the majority.” This is also related to Rousseau’s general will, which is often misunderstood, and the danger of the will of the majority being considered absolute.

  • Marx and Critique of Capitalism

  • Also of interest in this discussion is the perspective that capitalism functions as a “general will”. Marx criticized capitalism and strongly cautioned against its self-perpetuating nature and its domination by economic elites. In a sense, the CCP’s “deliberative elite system” and the “rugged capitalism” that exists outside of it contain an interesting paradox from Marx’s perspective. The composition of the system, which recognizes the power of capitalism, but controls it by a deliberative elite, is realized in a different context from that of Marx’s vision of the class struggle.

  • Habermas. The Deliberative Theory of

  • Furthermore, Habermas’ “publicness” and “deliberation theory” are also relevant to this discussion. Habermas emphasized consensus building through dialogic communication in civil society. However, unlike Habermas’ ideal, “deliberative elite systems,” such as the CCP, have a structure in which policy decisions by elites take precedence over civil dialogue.

Overall, the discussion explores two different political dynamics, “deliberation by elites” and “capitalism as general will,” which can be related to the discussions of thinkers such as Plato, Rousseau, Tocqueville, Marx, and Habermas. How the positions and theories of each thinker intersect with the contemporary CCP system and trends in capitalism is one of the key issues in contemporary political philosophy.

Please elaborate on “realized in a way that differs from the context of the class struggle as depicted by Marx.”

Marx's context of the "class struggle" is based primarily on the internal contradictions of capitalism and the resulting conflict between the proletariat (working class) and the bourgeoisie (capitalist class). Marx saw capitalism as a system in which capitalists exploit workers and maximize profits, thereby creating economic inequality and class conflict. He believed that this structural conflict would intensify and eventually lead to a revolution by the working class.

However, the relationship between the CCP’s “deliberative elite system” and “capitalism as general will” mentioned in the discussion juxtaposes capitalism and political control by elites in a different way than in the context of Marx’s class struggle. Specifically, they differ in the following ways.

1. control of capitalism by the elite

   • In Marx’s thought, capitalism, due to its inherent contradictions, envisioned a trend in which the conflict between the capitalist class and the working class would intensify and the working class would seize control to create a communist society. The CCP system, on the other hand, incorporates the dynamism of the capitalist economy, but outside of it, the Communist Party elite controls the entire society through deliberation. This structure prevents capitalism from running amok while at the same time harnessing its power for social development. This differs from the solution envisioned by Marx through “capitalism’s self-destruction and revolution,” but rather operates in a way that juxtaposes elements of capitalism and communism, with the elite maintaining a balance between the two.

2. suppression of class conflict

   • In Marx’s view of the class struggle, it was a historical necessity that the class conflict would intensify and the proletariat would revolutionize against the bourgeoisie. However, in the CCP system, the state allows capitalism to develop while the party suppresses and manages the discontent of the workers and other classes, thus preventing the class conflict envisioned by Marx. In other words, adjustments are made by the elite before class conflicts come to the surface. This structure makes it difficult for the Marxian concept of “class struggle” to appear, despite capitalist economic development.

3. the “general will” of capitalism

   • Another area where capitalism functions as a kind of “general will” under the CCP is that it differs from Marx’s assumptions. For Marx, capitalism was a system to maximize the profits of the bourgeoisie, and for the workers it was the very structure of exploitation. Here, however, “capitalism as the general will” means that capitalism is seen as the vital force for the benefit and development of society as a whole, and the communist elite makes policy decisions with this direction in mind. Thus, capitalism is not seen as a cause of conflict, as Marx assumed, but rather as a harmonious contribution to social development.

From these points of view, the CCP system harmonizes capitalism with a deliberative elite system, juxtaposing capitalist dynamism and communist control in an approach different from the “revolution through class struggle” envisioned by Marx. In this way, it can be said that the realization of the class struggle is different from that depicted by Marx.

What factors made this possible? What did Marx overlook?

Considering the factors that made possible the juxtaposition of the CCP's "deliberative elite system" and capitalism, and the ways in which Marx overlooked them, the following factors can be identified.

1. strong state control and flexibility

   • Marx saw the role of the state in capitalism as a “bourgeois state” protecting the interests of the capitalist class. As such, he believed that the state stood on the side of the capitalists in the class struggle and was fundamentally opposed to the interests of the working class. However, the CCP built a system that allowed the party to maintain strong control and flexible policy shifts while promoting the growth of the capitalist economy. In other words, the state serves to manage and control the movement of capital and coordinate the interests of workers and other classes.
   • What Marx overlooked was the possibility that the state could not unilaterally follow the capitalist class but could flexibly change its policies through elite deliberation, taking advantage of capitalism’s advantages while controlling its contradictions. This “flexibility of adjustment” allows capitalism and communism to coexist.
   • Okay, if the government can seize a successful company, the company needs to follow the government’s wishes. Do you have a specific example?
   • The Chinese government’s “community wealth” policy
     • In 2021, the Chinese government announced a policy of “common wealth” that emphasizes the redistribution of wealth. In response to this policy, many large corporations have shown their willingness to cooperate with the government and have made large donations to the public good. For example, Tencent announced that it would donate more than RMB 50 billion (approximately ¥850 billion) to “common wealth” projects. Thus, although companies appear to be donating voluntarily, in reality they are compelled to follow the government’s wishes and cooperate in the redistribution of wealth.

2. practical adaptation of ideology

   • Marx predicted the inevitability of a communist revolution and believed that the contradictions of capitalism would lead to its collapse. However, rather than adhering to communist ideology, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has adopted elements of capitalism and managed its policies with an emphasis on pragmatism. This has enabled the Communist Party to maintain its power and social stability while focusing on economic growth.
   • Marx assumed that ideology was fixed and that class consciousness was made conscious, but in fact he overlooked the fact that a flexible interpretation of ideology and the practical incorporation of capitalism, as in the case of the CCP, would allow for both a stable system of rule and economic growth.
   • Feel the influence of East Asian philosophy
   • East Asian philosophy has a tradition of emphasizing pragmatism, harmony, and decision-making from a holistic perspective, which is reflected in Chinese policy management. Below are some perspectives on its specific impact.
     1. Confucian harmony and practicality
        • Among East Asian philosophies, the influence of Confucianism is particularly significant. Confucianism emphasizes social harmony and order, and leaders are expected to rule virtuously over their people. However, another characteristic of Confucianism is practicality. While Confucianism strives for idealistic virtue-governance, it also has a pragmatic side that flexibly changes its policies in response to real-life situations. This speaks to the Chinese government’s approach of balancing realism and idealism.
        • For example, Marxism-Leninism was emphasized during the Maoist era, but since the Reform and Open Door Policy, there has been a flexibility to incorporate capitalist elements to meet the real needs of economic development. This attitude, which could be called “adaptationism,” has much in common with the Confucian tradition of “responding to the times,” and its pragmatism in the application of ideology can be seen.
     • (2) Taoist Inaction and Flexibility
       • Taoist thought takes a different approach from Confucianism, emphasizing harmony and flexibility. Lao Tzu’s philosophy of “no action, no nature” is based on the idea of not going against the natural flow of things and avoiding unnecessary interference. How this has influenced policy management in China is that while introducing a market economy and allowing some freedom for private enterprise to operate, the government intervenes when necessary and plays a role in maintaining overall harmony.
       • This leads to a flexible system of governance that respects the “natural flow” of the economy and society while allowing a deliberative elite to intervene as circumstances dictate. The flexible way of thinking of the Taoist “soft and fair goes far” may have influenced the fusion of capitalism and communism, or the resourceful operation of policy.
     3. strong control and discipline of the legal family
        • The legalist ideology also has a major influence on the CCP’s policy management. The legalists place the highest priority on the stability and strength of the state, emphasizing the maintenance of order through strict laws and strong controls. The legalist tradition is reflected in the Communist Party’s centralized system and its attitude of controlling society through laws and regulations.
        • These legalist elements manifest themselves as “elite deliberations” in the CCP’s system of governance, in harmony with the free development of the capitalist economy. The method of controlling markets and enterprises through strict regulations and discipline, and adjusting society toward the goals of the state, derives precisely from the powerful control philosophy of the legalists.
     4. overall perspective of Zen/Buddhism and “impermanence
        • The influence of Zen and Buddhism has also given East Asian thought a unique holistic perspective or “view of impermanence. In the management of China’s policies, there is a flexibility that is consistent with the “impermanence view,” which does not adhere to any particular ideology, but changes its policies in response to changing circumstances and times. This allows policy decisions to be made with an eye toward overall harmony while adapting to constantly changing international conditions and domestic economic trends.
     • The influence of these East Asian philosophies acts as a backdrop for the CCP’s prioritization of pragmatic responses and overall harmony over ideological adherence in its policies. The result is a flexible combination of communist and capitalist elements that allows for stable governance and economic development at the same time.

3. global economy and technological development

   • In Marx’s time, the impact of global economic development and technological innovation was not as pronounced as it is today. Modern China is actively participating in the global market economy and taking advantage of technological innovation and economic growth. The dynamism of this global economy and the introduction of new technologies have spurred domestic capitalist development, resulting in a higher standard of living for the working class and an expanding middle class.
   • Marx predicted that the contradictions of capitalism would progress within the domestic economy and intensify class conflict, leading to revolution, but in fact, participation in the global economy and technological advances have mitigated the contradictions of capitalism and prevented the outbreak of sharp class conflict. This “external pressure for economic growth” and the use of technological innovation are key factors overlooked by Marx that have enabled China’s economic growth and stability. In particular, by actively participating in the global economy, the contradictions associated with domestic capitalist development are absorbed by the demand and supply of the global market, thus mitigating the conflict between the working class and the capitalist class. Furthermore, technological development has served to increase productivity and expand the overall economic pie, thereby reducing widening inequality and worker dissatisfaction.

4. division and control of class consciousness

   • Although Marx emphasized the awareness of “class consciousness” as the key to class struggle, the CCP, by emphasizing state-led economic development and patriotic education, makes the working class and capitalist class less aware of the conflict and more focused on the “common goal” of the entire nation. Furthermore, the Communist Party’s propaganda and control prevents people from turning their awareness of and dissatisfaction with social inequality into a direct political movement.
   • This strategy of preventing individual class conflicts of interest from surfacing by offering larger narratives such as “the goal of the whole nation” and “the Chinese dream” is very different from the formation of working-class class consciousness that Marx envisioned.

5. hybrid of market and planned economy

   • China’s economic system can be described as a hybrid of a capitalist “market economy” and a communist “planned economy. While adopting the principles of free competition of a market economy, the state also exercises planned economic coordination and controls the direction of key industries and the flow of capital. This hybrid system allows the state to maintain stability and social control while taking advantage of capitalism’s benefits of efficiency and innovation.
   • Although Marx viewed capitalism and communism as opposites, he overlooked the fact that, in fact, by combining elements of both, economic growth and social stability can be achieved simultaneously.

Because of these factors, the juxtaposition of the CCP’s “deliberative elite system” and capitalism functions in a way beyond Marx’s assumptions. In particular, factors such as strong state control and flexible policy management, the use of the global economy and technological innovation, the division of class consciousness, and the hybrid strategy of market and planned economies allow the coexistence of capitalist dynamism and communist control in China.

Even if the Chinese system is successful, it is not easy for Japan to imitate it.

---

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/熟議エリートシステムと一般意志としての資本主義 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.