In recent years, “late-stage capitalism” has become the go-to term for describing the conditions and contradictions of modern society. As a phrase, it has been in use for well over a hundred years but has gained popularity in American academia as a shorthand for the second half of the 20th century, starting with the postwar economic boom and continuing on through modern day. Think “multinational oligopolies” rather than “robber barrons.”
In its casual usage, it has grown to be the preferred shorthand for anti-capitalist critique from the left. This idea of “late” capitalism has been used for almost a century to indicate that the current form of capitalism will be its last, and that an is imminent. Which seems very presumptuous.
The phrase is attributed to Werner Sombart in . In Sombart’s chronology, capitalism is divided into four eras:
- Proto-capitalism (1300s to early 1500s) – The transition from feudalism to mercantilism
- Early capitalism (1500s to early 1800s) – Consolidation of capital
- Mature capitalism (1800s to early 1900s) – The rise of the bourgeoisie and increased class stratification
- Late capitalism (1900s to present day) – The hellscape nightmare which we all presently endure
The successor to this late capitalism (and its expected arrival date) is open to the speculation of every socialist philosopher of the last 200 years. But the very term itself implies that we are in the endgame, that capitalism is against the ropes and on its last legs and that whatever comes next will be categorically different from the progression of capitalism over the last, oh, seven centuries.
I can appreciate this usage for the purpose of propaganda to indicate that the people’s revolution and liberation is just around the corner. And certainly it sometimes feels the capitalist model must be reaching the theoretical maximum of soul-crushiness allowed by the known laws of physics. But the reality is that it is simply naive terminology.
Sombart– and the successive economists and academics who popularized this term through the 1970’s– simply could not foresee the new perversions of capitalism that would run rampant at the end of the 20th century, nor did they have the imagination for the iterations yet to come.
Fukuyama’s “end of history” focused on liberal democracy as the final form of humanity’s societal progression, and although he argues that this end-state model includes a market-based economy, there is not as much discussion about the economic model that accompanies this pinnacle of social organization.
As an ideology, capitalism has worked tirelessly for the last seven hundred years to sculpt the foundations of modern society around its ideals; it has consolidated wealth, resources, and power into the hands of its controlling few, and has spun the delicate thread of modern civilization intricately around itself. This inextricability has only accelerated in the past fifty years with the advent of technological dependence, intangible financial markets, and the abandonment of pretense regarding a separation between our government officials and the ultra-rich that control them… or simply are them.
Why, then, do we feel that a collectivist revolution is imminent? Why do we assume that those with all the power and all the resources are anywhere near defeat? Why do we ignore that they are, in fact, at the peak of their power and continuing their upward progression? Is it because of the disgruntled grumblings in our online, leftist echo chambers? Is it the fiery rhetoric of a handful of congresspeople whom, well-intentioned as they may be, have thus far failed to grow their movement or exert any meaningful power?
The bleak truth is that leftists have failed to meaningfully move the needle in this direction in over two centuries. Yes, labor reforms and worker protections are important and wonderful achievements and yes, Scandinavian Europe has robust social welfare policies. But these have done nothing to erode the power of the capitalist class or to challenge the ideals of free-market capitalism. The biggest swings we took all ended up as failed states and cautionary tales, try as we might to justify their failures.
Perhaps the end of capitalism really is nigh; maybe the next sick meme on Left Twitter will convince billions of subjugated people to shake loose their chains and reclaim their liberty. Maybe proletariat solidarity or permanent revolution is right around the corner. Or maybe the capitalists continue to masterfully consolidate their power and find new, innovative ways to exploit the masses. Either way, this idea of capitalism is in its “late stage” is disingenuous at best and harmfully naive at worst; the term paints a false portrait of an oppressive and destructive force whose downfall is imminent and assured, when nothing could be further from the truth. Capitalism is merely in its latest stage.
