A Brief Introduction Monopoly is a term used by economists to refer to the situation in which there is a single seller of a product i. The word is derived from the Greek words monos meaning one and polein meaning to sell.
Who owns South Africa? The state also controls the means of coercion and administration, writes Lucien van der Walt. South Africa today is a morass of wretched inequality, racial tensions and class conflicts. Despite real gains in basic rights and welfare, and the abolition of apartheid laws, its transition remains limited and frustrating, 20 years on.
But this analysis and strategy, I argue, ignores major changes in the political economy associated with the s transition — notably, the denationalisation of the economy with massively expanded foreign ownership, and a growing black private corporate leadership — and also rests upon a very weak analysis of the state apparatus — both in terms of its class character and economic power.
Claims that blacks have political power, not economic power, or that white private corporations have a stranglehold over the economy, remove the black economic and political elite from the picture, erasing it from strategic considerations. South Africa, I argue, is controlled by a single ruling class, divided into two sectors: This is united at both a deep structural level, through common interests and interdependence, and at a more conjunctural level, by current neo-liberal programmes and alliances, among which note can be made of the Growth Employment and Redistribution Gear Strategy or the fact that almost every single cabinet minister is a shareholder in one or more companies.
It is not held together by the corruption of a few people, or by incorrect programmes, not by poor state leadership, not even by the ANC, all of which can be changed. The state can no more be wielded against private capitalists than one brick in a wall can fight another — and capitalism and the state can no more lose their character of exploitation and domination than a wall can become an aeroplane.
Efforts to capture the state can, at most, lead to a few people, mainly party leaders, joining the ruling class — nothing more. The strategic task must then become one of building a movement outside and against the private and state corporations and the state more generally, by the broad working class including the unemployedwhich is both victim and potential destroyer of the system.
It cannot form a reliable ally of the working class, partly because [p.
Byover With the s transition, the Big Four were not subject to any penalties, were largely exempted from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission TRCand benefited massively from post-apartheid economic policies and state contracts for example, construction in preparation for the World Cup.
In all parts of the private sector of the economy, the pattern of a few giant companies, persists: For example, Anglo sold many of its holdings in banks and retail, in favour of a mining focus.
They also globalised aggressively. Its single biggest current project is Brazil, not South Africa. The onset of neo-liberalism in the late years of apartheid under the National Party NP from and the acceleration of neo-liberalism under the ANC from changed the picture. Despite limited exports of capital — Anglo had more investments in the USA than Unilever, according to one estimate, argues Duncan Innes — the strict capital controls meant Anglo evolved from being a mining house to having massive holdings in agriculture, industry, retail and media.
The existing monopoly structure in mining and state industry was now systematised widely. It was ANC-led liberalisation of capital and other controls that allowed Anglo to relocate its primary listing to London in the s.
The NP had pioneered neo-liberal measures in the s, mainly through austerity, sales of major state companies like Iscor and Sasol, and tax reforms. The ANC continued these, but also opened the economic gates on a scale unseen since the early s.
It became more attractive to invest — sometimes, some would say, primarily, for short-term profits and speculation — but it also became easier: A major effect is that while South African companies controlled South African capital, reentering via channels elsewhere, the change is significant.
Sibanyoni writing in the City Press, with the proportion of senior managers in the private sector at Finally, the state is the elephant in the economic room. Standard images of the post-apartheid economy partially capture the reality:Many people have ample knowledge about different mobile phones and their companies, but a very few of them know something about operating systems.
It is vital to learn about different mobile OS used by many companies so that you can know that what is behind your smartphone’s smooth and colorful touchscreen. Above is the popularity [ ]. March 31, Microsoft A History of Anticompetitive Behavior and Consumer Harm March 31, Jun 27, · There are a variety of different market systems.
It is important for small business owners to understand what type of market system they are operating in when making pricing and production. 9 A. Microsoft’s monopoly power is established by direct evidence of its existence and exercise That Microsoft has monopoly power in operating systems is directly evidenced by the.
Apr 15, · China presently produces more than 95% of all rare earth materials that are vital in the creation of a big variety of electronic technologies. It is time to end that Chinese monopoly control of.
Microsoft does not have a monopoly on operating systems. There are plenty of people using Apple macOS, Linux (found in many embedded systems as well, like televisions and Ethernet routers), and there are an enormous number of tablet computers and phones running iOS or Android.