Reading Response 2 / Margot Harknett

To be very honest this subject is out of my element and the article, at times, had me lost on the point it was trying to make. With that being said Streeck talks about the different ways capitalism might end pointing out it’s symptoms of decreasing growth rates, increasing public and private debt, and increases in inequality. Because of these things capitalism is not able to keep it’s promise of progress for the community. He also mentions though that capitalism was brought about because of the successful Cold War and neo-liberal political forces. With the economic collapse in 2008 though Streeck believes that policies put in place then were just a stopgap and we need to figure out ways to stabilize markets other than sitting on fiat money. When the capital’s money intake slows it causes problems with the working population. This leads to exploitation and democracy handing over power to independent agencies and individuals. As long as corporate profits remain high then we get shared prosperity for higher productivity.

From that Streeck gets into what he calls the five disorders of the capitalist system. Those are stagnation, oligarchic redistribution, plundering of the public domain, corruption, and global anarchy. With stagnation he talks about slow long-term growth rates and how things are exploited to keep profits up. Oligarchic redistribution some capitalists are moving away from the people and looking overseas. Plunder of the public though underfunding and capital gain depends on public goods. Corruption is rising when boundaries between legal and illegal, corporate and political are blurred. Finally global anarchy is being threatened in the US with our military being over stretched and our dollar value dropping. Essentially what Streeck is saying is that capitalism is being hit from all sides and the economy is holding on through a life-support of unlimited assets. Instead of history repeating itself and capitalism being overthrown by other views Streeck suggests it will end through suicide.

Reading Response 1 / Margot Harknett

In the article Speculative Everything the likelihood cone model I found very interesting and relative to what we consider as designers and also in our future as humanity. The idea is having each cone represent the possible, plausible, probable, and ultimately the preferable fanning out in an order or varying degrees so that the preferable option is angled up, reaching into the plausible and possible. When we look at design in this way it opens up areas where we are able to step into conceptual design and create fictional situations to better our lives and the world around us. That is only achieved if we step away from the marketplace of how our world is run on capitalism.

The article Are You Ready To Consider That Capitalism Is The Real Problem, really drives home the fact that millennial are coming in tune with the world around them and are realizing that we won’t move forward unless we use a more collectivism approach to the way we run society. Pointing at the fact that what hinders us from a beneficial life for all is the distribution of power and wealth to big businesses. Decisions are made based off of profit more than the wellbeing of society.

The Rules article discusses the fact that instead of a politician we elected a businessman. This just hits on the point again that we run on a mindset that profit and money drive everything. At the same time it makes note that since we elected a businessman like Trump it proves that as a nation we are unhappy with the political system we currently have. The article talks about how working as a community, relying on our own hands rather than some higher political or economical figure we can build more of a creative growing world away from the media and mainstream politics.

The article I chose to relate to these was Capitalism Needs Design Thinking, an interview with Tim Brown and Roger Martin in IDEO. In it they discuss how what we have in the government today is not working, why it’s not working, and what needs to be changed. They point out the flaw that we keep seeing when they say, “What we’re working on now is the upside-down thesis—which postulates that government investment in a piece of infrastructure gets perverted and ends up not benefiting the folks it was designed for.” They follow that up by saying if the government worked the way design thinking works then things would go through ideations and ultimately be assessed by the user until it works. All of these articles related to the fact that the design process, “preferable” outcomes, and creative growth in the community cannot stem from a capitalist way of distributing power and praying off profit.