Veranderlijk coronabeleid gevolg van interne tegenstellingen van het kapitaal (Engels)

The inhuman laws of capital that drove the emergence of the virus are presented to us as laws of nature, and are the states’ excuses for flip-flopping. “We want to save lives”, they say, “but not at the cost of livelihoods”. Not one of the politicians or pundits ever acknowledges the barbarity of a world in which those two things are opposed. Deprived of the power and information needed to make decisions about our lives in general and our health in particular, we are forced into whatever bullshit jobs we can get and told to leave everything to the state. The purpose of the British state is to represent the interests of capital, whose taxes and credit keep it servile, but different parts of capital have different interests. Industrial capital and capital tied to essential services like supermarkets and agriculture has largely been exempted from furloughing workers, and so it can stomach long lockdowns with a view to eventually returning to normal trading. On the other hand, capital in hospitality, tourism, commercial aviation, etc. is hell bent on ensuring the most minimal lockdowns possible to prevent loss of profits, or even bankruptcy. Similarly, landlords face the ruinous consequences of tenants being able to delay payments or even miss them entirely, and so they too join the chorus for an easing of restrictions. The middle class business owners and managers are under acute pressure and large sections have already sunk into the working class. All these groups are represented in parliament, and the bitter arguments, U-turns, late starts, nonsensical directives, etc. are the process of capital negotiating with itself. While it appears to be a power standing over society, in reality the state is dominated by the interests of capital, even when they conflict with the interests of humanity.

AWW in A Plague on Both Your Houses – The Position of the Working Class in the Current Crisis (