The dark matter of CasP? What can’t we observe about capitalist power?

[jmc]

I’m trying not to overthink how I am applying a concept of physics to the methods of CasP, but I have recently been wondering where and why a picture of capitalist power is filled with dark matter — i.e., capitalist power that cannot be observed because it is private, informal, or illegal. There are the firms that are privately owned, so we cannot gather much financial information about them. There are organizations like churches where capitalization is relevant to what they own, but these types of organizations are not typically characterized in capitalist terms. Then there is the world of organized crime, where the biggest cartels have income streams that are large enough to compete with major multinationals. But good luck getting a glimpse of those ledgers — as Michael Corleone says to Kay at the end of The Godfather, only one time is she allowed to ask about the family business.

Here is the thought experiment: We somehow have a massive picture of every single person, firm, institution, church, and government that (a) sabotages by exerting control through ownership and (b) calculates future earning potential with a capitalization formula, sophisticated or rudimentary.

• How much of this picture is clear and observable to the outside researcher?
• What is required to see more of the picture?
  • Do we need better data?
  • Do we need more data?
  • Do we require entirely new tools of measurement?
• Is this so-called dark matter a limit of CasP’s methods as they have been developed so far?
• If we magically could see the inner workings of private companies and other institutions, would we have better explanations for such effects as differential accumulation?
• Are the premises of this thought experiment false?

 

 

• This topic was modified 1 day, 2 hours ago by jmc.
• This topic was modified 1 day, 2 hours ago by jmc.
• This topic was modified 1 day ago by jmc.

Topic

[Pieter de Beer]

While in physics, dark matter cannot be observed directly, it is studied through its effects on the broader system with which it exists.

 

Similarly, we could use resource flows around unobserved  or unobservable capital.

 

Private firms do business with on-private firms, and while this won’t provide the full picture about them, it will provide hints on how to refine data about private firms.

Organized crime cartels and syndicates are already providing a ton of data…. But to the state entities that are meant to be investigating them. This data would include resource inputs, crime statistics, social networks, and probably a plethora of sources I can’t think of right now.

[Jonathan Nitzan]

The ‘dark-matter’ syndrome is inherent to scientific modelling. All scientific models are wrong to some extent – either because the modellers exclude important elements and misrepresent or omit relevant relations, or because they over-simplify. The built-in errors are not always apparent — for example, initially, Ptolemaic cosmology seemed superior to the heliocentric one. And often the errors are being hidden by inventing new terms, such as Phlogiston in chemistry, the production-function ‘residual’ in economics, and (perhaps) the ‘dark matter’ of cosmology.

I think that, as a new approach with few researches and a very limited number of studies, CasP must be full of dark matter, residuals and Phlogiston-like substances. And I suspect that its unknowns extend far beyond the black and grey economies and unreported activities. In the grander scheme of things, CasP theory is still in its early sketching stages, and even its most brilliant studies merely scratch the empirical surface.

But there is an upside. Unlike neoclassical theory, which gave up science in defence of capitalism, and contrary to Marxism, which has been impaired by dogma and/or surrendered to postism, CasP is still young and uncommitted and therefore able to plow through many of these difficulties — at least for the time being!

 

• This reply was modified 2 hours, 47 minutes ago by Jonathan Nitzan.

[Author]

Replies