Socialists who align with growthism should remember what GDP measures: not use-value, nor livelihoods, nor provisioning, but exchange-value. It is a metric devised by capitalists to serve the interests of capitalism. John Smith nails it in "Imperialism in the 21st Century": 
GDP growth makes little sense as an indicator for anyone who claims socialist values. Socialist policies focused on use-value, care, public provisioning, and decommodification would improve social outcomes but could very well reduce GDP growth.
GDP measures things with market prices. If you decommodify healthcare, education, energy, housing etc, GDP goes down. That means you need less income to survive, and do not need to render your labour to capital to produce things you do not need in order to access things you do.
Capital convincing labour unions and socialists that their interests are served by calling for more GDP growth was one of the biggest coups of the 20th century. Total consensus around the interests of capital. Growthism is Gramscian cultural hegemony in the truest sense.
As Simon Kuznets himself put it, "Distinctions must be kept in mind between quantity and quality of growth, between its costs and return, and between the short and the long term. Goals for more growth should specify more growth of what and for what."
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
