Marxism, Capitalism and the State
Sometimes I go and read some Marxist websites just to amuse myself of the amount of nonsense the Communists can come up with. I have read into the Marxist view on the State how, according to them, the State is an instrument of Capitalism and it is used to protect the wealth of the rich, and maintain the Class society, and things like that. They also say that there was no State before there was no abundance in wealth (capital) and everyone lived in an egalitarian society in utopia, but as technology advanced and more labor saving technology was invented, excess capital created the Capitalist class.
Ok this is a very confusing argument and they surely as hell like to confuse dumb people, luckily I am a sharp intellectual that can see past the bullshit. So let's start debunking it 1 by 1.
1) Noble Savage Myth
First of all there was no egalitarian utopia 30,000 years ago. It is the Noble Savage myth, whereas many delusional people think that the current society is so bad because we have all these wars and problems, but fail to realize what life was like 30,000 years ago.
Like dying in horrible pain at age 6 because of cholera, or having an infant morality rate of 80%, and things like that. It's kind of hard to imagine a utopia civilized society under such harsh conditions.
They literally think that we all shared resources 30,000 years ago and we lived in a Garden of Eden.
But what really happened is that the strongest Alpha Male became the chieftain and if you disobeyed him, you were fed to the wolves, and your wife got gangraped. That is what really happened 30,000 years ago.
So you must be a special kind of moron to believe in this socialist utopia 30,000 years ago. By the way, they also claim that there was no State before Capitalism.
Well I beg to differ. See the State is nothing more than the pure manifestation of violence in society. So when you had bloodthirsty chieftains, I'd pretty much call that a State. In fact it was a more totalitarian State than any other since it was so close to you, it was like a couple meters away from you all the time if you lived in a tight village or camp in a forest 30,000 years ago. And it was totalitarian, the chieftain told you what to do all day, every day, your kids were totally owned, and if you didn't behave correctly, your wife was also taken from you. So it was 100% State direct control, even worse than Hitler.
2) The State
Again, the State is not the buildings or the rituals or the people in them. The State is the sum of all organized violence in a society. So the State appeared when the first human formed a gang to steal from another human or subjugate him.
Whenever some strong guy 30,000 or even 100,000 years ago found a group of people who were weak, he told them, "from now on you obey me or die!". That is when the first State was formed. That is the State.
The current State is more polished, much bigger, with more complex rituals and customs, but it's essentially the same thing, it's the violence beneath the subterfuge.
3) The State used to protect Capitalists
Another mistake the Marxists make is that they think the State is there to protect Capitalism or the wealth of the Capitalists. Well this is partially true, but there are also a few misconceptions here.
First of all I would not consider the "ruling class" Capitalist. I mean is the King a Capitalist? Just because he owns private property?
Are the Marxists Capitalists because they own private property? But then they make a difference here, they say that there is a difference between "personal property" and "private property" , as the personal property is property used for personal reasons and private property is the means of production.
But this is horseshit, your brain is a means of production, so by this reasoning everyone is Capitalist. So it's not the private property classification that distinguishes Capitalists.
It's neither the amount of weath they have:
- Jonny has 5$
- Jim has 5,000,000$
Is Jim the ruler of Jonny? Nope. So it's neither the amount of money a person has that makes him a ruler.
It's actually the fact whether they will initiate force against someone, or not. So if Jim makes money and doesn't try to steal from Jonny, then Jim is just as good as Jonny, they are not in a ruler<>subject relationship, they might not even know eachother.
The King is not a Capitalist, even if he does have property, a lot of it, because the King declares himself as sovereign, and everyone else his subject. So the relationship between you and the King is that he is your ruler, and you are his slave.
There is no Capitalism there, that is just a pure master<>slave relationship.
So Capitalism is voluntary, you can be rich or poor in it, but the rich capitalist is not your ruler: the State is.
And the State is not there to protect any wealth other than his own. I can guarantee you that if some revolution were to break out, the State will not send out the military to protect McDonalds, but you will definitely see tanks around the Parliament to protect the State.
4) The Myth of Communism
Which brings me to my conclusion: Communism is a delusion, there never was Communism, there never will be.
There was certainly no Communism 30,000 years ago, and there certainly won't be 30,000 years from now.
So there are only 2 entities that exist:
- Capitalism: The sum of all voluntary interactions in a society
- The State: The sum of all violent interactions in a society
There is only Capitalism & The State, that is all there is and, hopefully Capitalism will defeat the State in the end.
Bolshevism:
Bolshevism was a political ideology that wanted to create Communism by eliminating Capitalism. Well they did eliminate Capitalism in the Soviet Union, and guess what they were left with a Totalitarian Vicious Police State.
They didn't got Communism but they surely got a beastly State that committed all sorts of atrocities.
Chomsky:
I kind of like Chomsky's insights on politics, but his theory about the State is laughable. He said on many occasions that yeah well you can't really do much about the State, so let's just use the State to bring democracy and get rid of Capitalism and things like that. I'm not sure where he is going with that line of reasoning. But it seems to me that every single progressive is like in love with the State. The State should do this, the State should do that.
But to translate it it would be like: "I want violence to happen here , I want violence to happen there". That's all it is.
So instead of asking people nicely, or reasoning with them, let's just commit violence against them, because that is really the pinnacle of civilization.
The State is truly a beast, and these stupid people who just want to grow the power of it, are playing with fire. They might end up with a Soviet style Police State, because that is exactly what the Bolsheviks have ended up with.
The US already looks like a Police State and it's dominated by Progressives. How is that possible? Is it a coincidence?
So I am telling you there are only 2 options:
- Voluntary peaceful interactions between humans
- Violence, initiation of violence, coercion & threats
This is the litmus test of the civilized society, you either have Voluntarysm and Peace, or you have the State and Violence.
THE STATE WILL NOT WITHER AWAY IF YOU KEEP FEEDING THE BEAST, WAKE UP MARXISTS, DON'T BE STUPID, JOIN CAPITALISM!
Sources:
- https://pixabay.com
- Thus Spoke Zarathustra by F. Nietzsche, based on the Thomas Common Translation, extensively modified by Bill Chapko
the left is mad because they think that a billionaire shouldnt be allowed to be president because in their twisted mind, its some sort of "Facism" which they DONT understand they think facism is just the merger of their TWO biggest fears, BIG BUSINESS and the Government, thats all they really know, as if someon teacher in jr high told all these kids "yeah facism is the merger of big business with the state" which is not very accurate but whatever, thats what they think trump is
they fail to realize that the Trump organoization is NOT some infuential geopolitical fucking mastermind think tank its a fucking hotel company so relax...its like....They think business is SOOO evil
they REALLY believe all busines is evil...they dont see any of the god it proovidess
they write "fuck capitalism" on their iphone sharing it to sicla media they dont get that capitalism is already changuing becoming the "sharing economy"
HAHAHAAH Uber and AirBNB are Karl Marx's fucking dream come true haha they fucking loved that idea of a farmer being able to rent out a tractor and people sharing stuff, but people always argued there was no way to actually share stuff fairly and keep track of it all, but now there is with smartphones and computer networks LOL so you can just do all those time keeping property sharing sharing economy mechanisms and its a dream come true, cyber communism lol but its beyond what they dreamed
im scared we will end up with socialism no matter what, NOT the sort of socialism we have known...this will be like space socialism
space communism
like if the soviet union would have gone to the moon and then what??? how would a soviet sysyetm work in space??
and thats a masterful Zarathustra quote! "The State is the coldest monster of them all. And it coldly speaks this lie from it's mouthy: " I , the State, am the people" " (I took the liberty to rephrase that archaic sounding english translation of late 1800s Nietzchean German and translated back into more relatable common Internet English. I wish Walter or David in Alien covenent would hav quoted Nietache
Its all about Fully Automated Luxury CAPITALISM dunno WHy people had a stupid idea of fully automated luxury communism, its fully automated luxur capitalism where everyone is at least middle class ...the poor will be a tiny minority of people who are just bad with money...there will be low quality but fre houses for people, and higher quality housed available for people who find ways to make money ...
Although I think Uber is a bit overrated, the commissions there are awful, so there is a lot of room for improvement there, it will probably go away in a few years and replaced by some blockchain based car rental system.
But otherwise I agree, capital is the force that will create wealth and opportunity in this world.
I don't think every progressive is in love with the state. Chomsky is an anarchist, which by definition is against the idea of a state government, although he may see it currently as the best short term solution.
I think communism is a somewhat noble and grand idea but in a nutshell and in reality; people are not ants, we are not selfless.
But it doesnt matter what they think, what matters is what they advocate for. While Chomsky calls himself anarcho-syndicalist / anarcho-communist.
Every single political position he takes is in favor of growing state power, even if he said on multiple occasions that the State should not interfere in the economy but it should be controlled by workers unions.
And I see this trend with many progressives: take the LGBT movement.
Don't get me wrong I support the LGBT movement, but take a look at what they are doing. There are many religious bigots that hate gay people, so instead of reasoning with them, organizing educational events and things like that where the LGBT community can interact with closed minded people and show them how it is better if they stop hating people. So reasoning with your adversary.
Nope, what they do is just call the nanny State and advocate for passing of hate-speech and anti-discrimination laws.
In Canada they take it as far as they call for fining of people if they refer to an LGBT person with the wrong pronoun.
Well that sounds like tyranny to me. And it's true for every kind of progressive movement.
And things like that. The progressives are not voluntarysts, while their goals are noble, they still use the State for it.
People should learn already that the end's don't justify the means.
You can't create freedom through the State.
Communists have their hearts in the right place but they are so delusional. Ancap/voluntarism is the way to go.
Nice information
Yes, good stuff. However, I think a distinction needs to be made where the parts of capitalism where the states intervene, which always ends up bad. That is chrony capitalism. That's what occupy wall street should have been protesting. The people who get rich from the government, which is from all of us in the end.. I'm from Ancapistan, where we live in anarcho capitalist happiness(someday)! But keep spreading the good word!
I don't think that is capitalism. The henchmen of the State are not capitalists, they are parasites.
The State is the beast and the cronies are like the fleas in it that suck your tax money out in form of corporate subsidies.
In a voluntary society, if you want to succeed you will need to compete fairly.
Its not, but its done under the guise of capitalism.. All the people at occupy wall street blamed capitalism, there was a reason they did.. All those banks, who in a capitalist society would have shut down or been bought up by more successful real capitalists. Were instead bailed out, creating a link between the government and those companies, that is crony capitalism. It exists. Its not real capitalism I agree, but it needs to be addressed. People think we live in a capitalist society, but when the government steps in and interferes. It is an attempt to destroy the foundation and good name of capitalism
Well that is the definition of a parasite, they pretend to be something they are not. When a virus enters your body it fools your nearby cells by injecting certain chemicals in them to think that it is part of your body. And then it starts reproducing.
That is what every parasitic organism does, it disguises itself to fool it's prey.
I agree man. It gives good anarcho capitalism a bad name. We just need the parasite of! Keep doing what your doing and spreading awareness!
You should distinguish between capitalism and anarcho-capitalism. You being a proponent of the latter would probably claim that no capitalism is true unless it is anarchistic. But this is not reality, only wishful thinking.
Truth is there has been no significant capitalism so far without a big state-like power above. Big corporations can only grow because of the state. The state is like the power environment (like mafia or war lords) who ensures contract fulfillment between individual entities and thus enables big private property. Without it, to-be-capitalism creates it's own super-monopoly in order to grow further. The mafia is in fact a state within a state, and some people even appreciate it's law-and-order. The mafia has grown naturally from the originally decentralized people. Consequently, an impressive shadow-economy became possible within the mafia power structure.
And of course the government army is helping big corporations. They are doing so all the time with free-trade agreements, wars, secret intelligence, imperialism, geopolitics.... Eventually big corporations become so big that they control the state, that's why we saw "too-big-to" fail. Mussolini was not only fascist, he also was capitalist (corporate-fascism).
And you definitely need to learn more about pre-history. The paleolithic social model 30000 years ago was the horde, which was basically an extended family. The superordinated unit was the tribe. It still exists today in some remote places like Amazon and Borneo. You don't want to tell us that they live less free than under Hitler and their women are being always gang-raped, c'mon.
I will only tackle a shard here. Many of the Ten Planks came from secret societies. Central banks were well before Marx. Furthermore, the overthrow of the Tsar was financed by a certain cadre of NYC bankers. Communism has always been a front for corporatism to form monopolies. Pure capitalism opposes corporatism.
The best example of this is the early colonies: Plymouth and Jamestown. If you have read their charters, you will see that the conditions of communism were imposed on the colonies by the respective British Trading Companies.
When the denizens went into starvation they overthrew the charters and embraced laissez-faire capitalism. In a short time, they both thrived so much, they started trading with Spain and other nations. The trading companies petitioned the British Legislature and the Navigation Acts became law. Before it had a name, the British empire was fascist. The term fascist has been bandied around so much that few even know its meaning. Its roots are a bundle. Fascism is the bundling of the state and the ruling corporations.
The U.S. Constitution was a planned tyranny; usurping the Articles of Confederation. Again, we look no further than the secret societies. Soon, they had a central bank.
Look at modern-day U.S. The Big Six have monopolized nearly every aspect of American agriculture and are now moving on GMO marijuana and its distribution monopoly. The Soviet Union, at its zenith, never had zoning regulations.
American public schooling serves a dualistic purpose: indoctrination and training children to work for the local corporations. The state and its several parts are all incorporated.
State-free societies have worked up to the point that they failed to arm themselves against tyranny from without.
Amazing article friend! Sometimes I get my brother to school and when I come to take him home he tells me what the teachers said during the classes. Is really a sad situation, the cultural marxism puts in the childs mind the opposit of what you teaches us in your article. I was reading this text here:
https://steemit.com/freedom/@thomasmmaker/article-a-thought-about-freedom-and-education-03
I think it complements what you have said, we are educated to a "state religion" and this makes us not to see other options and better forms of society, as it is the anarchism.