The Basics of Anti-Capitalism - Exploitation and Imperialism - Part One

Few people actually understand how capitalism operates, and even less understand the arguments against it

Capitalism is the most common economic system in today’s world. That does not mean it is the best, in truth it is far from it. The basics of anti-capitalism state that capitalism cannot exist without the following: poverty, oppression, war, and ecological destruction. Capitalism is a system that allows a few people to get billions and a few billion people to get basically nothing. There is already a system that can do better for everybody, the problem is that capitalism benefits the powerful the most.

The Basics of Capitalism


To understand anti-capitalism, one first must understand capitalism. Capitalism is based on the private ownership of capital. Out of this comes the other bases of the system, wage labor and profit.

A quote by Karl Marx can sum up the definition of capital quite nicely.







To sum it up, capital has the ability to add value to itself.

Based on the labor theory of value, the true value of items is equal to the amount of socially necessary labor it takes to produce it. Basically, human labor is needed to produce or acquire any object, thus it is the only thing that can be used to measure the true value. More on that here. [1]

The value capital adds to itself must come from somewhere. This somewhere is the only thing value comes from:e the workers. This can only happen through the use of surplus value extraction, and is unable to happen through personal or collective property. This is because when a few people hold a monopoly on the tools needed to produce a good, the worker is dependent on them. When the worker is dependent on them, they can extract value from the worker. This surplus value is equal to the value the worker adds to the goods he labors on minus the amount which he is paid. All profit comes from extracted surplus value. In the end, the workers’ only options are to starve, labor, or be lucky enough to earn enough to own capital and start the cycle anew. [3]

The problem is that tools are more efficient when they are bigger and there are more of them. This means that bigger businesses can easily overcome smaller ones. In other words, the more capital one has, the faster it increases. This leads to a concentration of capital.

One example of this problem is bitcoin. Proof of Work is becoming concentrated within a few miners within China. This is for two reasons. Electricity is cheaper in China, and electricity, cooling, and components are often cheaper in bulk. Centralization can not be escaped under a private market system. That leads into the other problems of capitalism.




Keeping Power

Incentives are the most influential part of any system. Under capitalism, the main incentive is wealth. This brings in a problem. Wealth is power. This gives the capitalist class, the owners of private property, the ability to dictate society. They do this in many ways including lobbying, propaganda, censorship, and even acts of violence. The tools they use to do this come in many forms; however, they usually only go by two names: The government and the media. There are no better tools for this job.



Lobbying

First we will go over lobbying. Getting elected (or any other high-up position at this stage, government or not) costs massive amounts of money. In the United States alone about 3 billion dollars were spent on the 2016 elections for house, senate, and presidential campaigns.[1] The majority of this has come from the rich, through companies (which have no cap), or themselves personally (which does actually have a cap). Nobody even choses as a candidate will have a chance of winning without massive money behind them. This is in an effort to introduce more “pro-business” legislation, to increase business profits. Since these profits come directly from the worker, they are anti-worker.

The reason the workers do not do anything about this is because that they require a steady job. Under capitalism, the only way to acquire a steady job is to work for a successful company, no matter how bad it is for them in the long run. This is because of the massive control of the economy the capitalist has. In an economy where the worker has gained more power, the businesses are unable to “dominate”. They will simply leave and find a place where they can more easily exploit the worker. (This place is now called the third world.) This makes the exploitation of workers not only a luxury, but a necessity. On top of that, a country must bow to the will of the businesses, effectively giving them complete control.

Propaganda and the Media

Capitalists are masters of propaganda. This is one of the main reasons capitalism still exists. They run propaganda in many ways. As was already discussed, the capitalist class effectively controls the government. This means all pro-business and pro-country propaganda is effectively pro-capitalist propaganda. Aside from the government, all privately controlled media is subject to the will of the capitalist class. Media, both small and large, depends on the capitalist class for revenue. This revenue disappears for any large pro-worker media.




source




About 10 companies own all of media and they only have their own interests in mind. The commodity they sell is the attention of those watching, not the advertisements.

There is more to the control of the ruling class, though bosses often do not have direct control over what news is told, they do have other ways to control it. They control the distribution, the context, and even the language used. Using the time of day and the channel they can choose who to show it to, by using context they can have a massive effect on what people think of it, and the language used can seal the deal. Using “job creators” instead of “capitalist class” can make the workers class feel dependent and even thankful. On top of that, every news station reports on how everything affects the business, but often ignores or downplays the workers. Anything written by the workers point of view is treated as “activist” or “radical”. That is how propaganda operates. More information here.

Fun fact: Entire TV shows are often canceled if they become too popular with the wrong audience. For propaganda to work effectively, an audience must be segmented.

Violence

Violence is the last-ditch effort to subdue the workers. This violence comes in many forms and happens for many reasons.

Mass killings against anti-capitaists have become a common event. A few examples of countries doing this are: Argentina From 1976 to 1983, China with The Shanghai massacre of 12 April 1927, East Timor during the Indonesian occupation, multiple massacres in El Salvador, Germany during Hitlers rise to power, Guatemala since 1965, Iran during the failed revolution, Indonesia during 1965-1966, Korea during the Korean war, Spain during the white terror, Taiwan during the white terror, Thailand by the “Communist Suppression Operations Command”. The smallest of these only killed a few tens of thousands of people, while the Indian one was far over a million. Here is more information.

Firstly, this graphic will show how often the United States attacks other countries.





source




Here you can find a list of 35+ dictators that the United States has backed. The leader of the free world does seem to love doing that. One big example is Iraq. The United States put Saddam Hussein in power. The reason they chose to take him out was simple. He tried to sell oil for the Euro instead of the Dollar, trying to take away the power of the United States economically. We invaded them and did one thing that stands out, even above the war crimes. We privatised the oil, we gave ownership to the ruling class in our own country.

Many of the pro capitalists will say: “That isn’t true capitalism, there is a government involved”. There is one thing they don’t understand, imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism. Without imperialism capitalism would literally collapse.

One of the biggest flaws in capitalism is that it must always expand. This is due to the nature of competition. Each business must compete with each other, or risk losing market share. To keep market share they must keep making more products for cheaper. On top of that, profit is made. The vast majority of this profit is reinvested within the company, forcing expansion. This expansion also leads to overproduction, which can cause a crisis. With all companies expanding and the rate of profit falling there are only two options: finding new markets, or turning to monopolies. Sometimes both. [4][5]

The expansion under capitalism has limits. The most common limits encountered is the border of the nation. This plus a finite and decreasing wage, means that new markets can not be created forever within a nation. One option is titans extracting a guaranteed profit without competition, a monopoly. That exists today, 5 people own as much wealth as the bottom 50% of the world. Profit motive, the integral aspect of capitalism makes this worse. Investment capital must have somewhere to go, nobody wants to waste an opportunity for profit. This means eventually new opportunities for profit must be opened up, outside of the country. Once there are none left, society will collapse or turn to outright slavery due to overproduction and monopolies.

To stave off the collapse of society, capitalists must turn to super-profits. Super-profits come from producing goods in third world countries at extremely reduced production costs, and shipping them to the first world. (Since labor is a production cost, this can also be considered super-exploitation.) The profit is then shared with the working class of the imperialist nation, to buy their loyalty. This nation becomes their farm of loyal soldiers and police. The “working class” of this imperialist nation then has an interest in upholding capitalism at the expense of everybody else. [6]

This can be seen often today. The privatisation of oil in Iraq, the miners in Africa, and those who produce our goods in China.




This is only the first part, expect more to come. There is a lot more wrong with capitalism than exploitation and imperialism, the methods used to keep this system in place have killed hundreds of millions.




Want to learn more economics and politics? Subscribe and Upvote!

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

Sort:  

The problem is that tools are more efficient when they are bigger and there are more of them. This means that bigger businesses can easily overcome smaller ones.

This was proven to be wrong. What Marx didn't take into account is the value of human capital, of creativity, innovation and service skills. His entire logic fails because of this wrong conjecture. In reality, an economy based on many small businesses is much more efficient than one based on few large firms.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/trade-society/news/bigger-is-better-large-companies-good-for-the-economy-study-finds/

looked it up, first thing I found. Read imperialism the highest stage of capitalism, it has a massive amount of evidence, including statistics.

so you're telling me 5 people can do as much research as intel or amd? Nice joke.

President of European Small Business Alliance (ESBA), a non-party political group, David Caro commented on the report:

"There is a paradox to be found here. We all agree that small and medium seized enterprises (SMEs) are the 'backbone of the European economy' and we look to our small companies to get us out of the crisis, yet large businesses still contribute disproportionately more to our economy. Unfortunately, this reaffirms the message that we have been voicing for years: cut down on the regulatory and administrative burden for SMEs, improve access to and cost of finance and allow small businesses to prosper, innovate and grow," Caro said.

I couldn't say it better myself. The only thing I have to say as someone who happens to work for the EU is that they don't know the first thing about economic efficiency. I also worked for two large companies in the telecom industry and I witnessed from first hand how size hindered their efficiency and their competitiveness until they are finaly beaten by smaller competitors.

As to what you said abot colonialism, if this is so then why was the Soviet union one of the greatest colonialist agents in history.

"I witnessed from first hand how size hindered their efficiency and their competitiveness until they are finaly beaten by smaller competitors.:

then why do large companies exist. Why do they bother buying other companies. Why do 5 people own more wealth than the bottom 50% of that is not "better".

Big businesses can afford to be less efficient and still come out on top.

Look at central heating, it costs way less per person than small heaters in every room. The same goes for every tool they have to use. It costs less to buy windows in bulk, and to deploy other types of software. Its a lot cheaper to run a massive factory than having a million individuals do it. That's why weaving went industrial.

Tell me, how efficient is it to ship a hundred product in one truck vs only being able to make and ship 10.

Tell me, how is a thousand individual miners better alone? Unless they are renting the means of production, (which means the true ruling class is the ones renting it out, making it centralised still), they would each have to buy their own. That costs more than collectively buying one, far more efficient, machine that they could never afford.

We don't even need wars any more. Young people can not afford to pay for rent of flat or house any more.... https://steemit.com/money/@worldfinances/young-people-let-them-die

imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism.

Capitalism is long gone. It ended in 1914 when FED was established.

the fed was established because the natural progression of capitalism is the centralisation of power into a few members of the ruling class and government.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/

This book explains it well

So essentially, either capitalism always collapses into whatever you call this, or whatever you call this is capitalism. IDC which you choose.

also because it annoys me. Capitalism is based off of the word capital, which is essentially private ownership of the means of production. So nothing about how free the people feel makes it more or less capitalism. That's ideology and is useless when describing material conditions of the world, which is what economics is actually for.

"improve access to and cost of finance"

finance capital does not want competition, it wants domination.

"McDonald's, the nation's biggest restaurant chain, is, in fact, very profitable. Those $5.5 billion in profits last year came from revenues of $27.6 billion, giving the Golden Arches a profit margin of nearly 20%. The average profit margin of big companies in the S&P 500 index is only 8.7%, according to S&P Capital IQ."

give me actual statistics, not stupid quotes. The inefficiency comes from the nature of capitalism, not the nature of large machinery. Linux, windows, and osx could never have been made by individuals, nobody even understands how all of each operating system works. (Well, for windows at least not sure about the others)

Linux was actually made by individuals

tens of thousands of them working together. I'm not talking about the original, I'm talking about what it is today. Yet again you can see linux at a very low market share compared to windows. That is because they are not a company, like the small but "better" businesses, they can't advertise, provide oems incentives, or anything else.

also on top of that everything is made by individuals, the only difference is whether they actually have control over the tools they are using, including themselves

You shouldn't use an OS, or much of the tech field as an example, they really can be made by small companies. They just usually get bought out by a massive company.

what should I run a computer from bios then?

Space magic.

even steemit proves it. The more steem power you have the more you are able to make. This means you can expand faster and pay your own cost of living with less loss of profit.

also a command economy is more efficient in every possible way than any capitalist one, your logic fails.

I think this is a false dicotomy. It's not command economy vs capitalist economy. It's socialist vs capitalist.

We are not that far off from a society where a few large super-monopolies control the world economy for the benefit of a minority. It can be argued that such a situation is a "command economy". That scenario is far from a true socialist economy.

the most common form of socialism is a command economy

also that would still be more efficient than a market in many ways.

I think that debating over the which is more efficient (small vs big) misses the point (on both sides of the argument).

We have to keep in mind that the whole marxist analysis does not revolve around what is better but on how capitalists extract value from the workforce and keep it for themselves.

In other words from a marxist perspective wage labor is another form of slavery the same way that some ancaps see the State vs the rest of society (but fail to extend the analysis to that same society)

A lot of "marxists" and/or "socialists" lose sight of this.

The way that big businesses crush small businesses is a side effect of how they take advntage of economies of scale (as an example: what happens to small shops in the US when Walmart opens a store in a small town)

Wow ! your post is very impressive. I liked Carl Max he was a very smart Guy. I think capitalism has a Expiry Date. Companys try to make as much money as they can. And they dont care about our planet or about other People. Buy they always forget one thing we just have one Earth!.

Most people believe that anarchy is lawlessness but that's simply not the truth.

Anarchy begins with the concept of Sovereignty. But Who or what is a sovereign?

Anarcho-Capitalists believe that each person is an Individual Sovereign Entity who can privately own everything he can personally control and no other Sovereign Entity has the Right to use force against him to take that which he controls.

Anarcho-Communists believe in the opposite that people can own nothing except that which he can hold or reasonably need to survive and that the "Group" as a whole is sovereign.

Statism in the United States is a combination of both, where the group is sovereign but people have rights regulating the use of force.

Of course this is all theory, nothing is absolute but I was wondering where we can find examples of either type of Anarchy in de facto operation and this is the result of my observations:

https://steemit.com/anarchy/@adconner/globalism-is-anarcho-capitalism

Very good

seems helpful to me..

As was already discussed, the capitalist class effectively controls the government.

I think it's the other way around. Government effectively controls industry. Sure, through lobbying a corporation or coalition of corporations can come out on top, but it is only one win in a never-ending series of battles. Just as often, they are restricted or punished by government. And it is the power of government that enables them to exert control over the economy when they do. Without that vehicle, the ability to write laws that force competitors out of business or consumers to purchase their products, corporations would be mostly powerless to rig the system in their favor.

When chile elected a socialist they didn't becone socialist. The capitalist class stopled the movement of all goods, including food, until he was voted out. The food was in the stores the next day, and they were no less capitalist.

The capitalist class could not exist without the government and its property rights, they are inseparable.

Before you say my statements are in contradiction, they are not. The capitalist class become a government above the other one elected by the people.

I fundamentally disagree, and I will leave it at that.

great argument, full of historical examples and logic backing up your system of thought. good job

(Gets the popcorn) may the onslaught begin.

nah m8 that failure will mute me and run away to its safe space, I guarantee it.

I'm going to bed either way, I have stuff to do tomorrow

My guess is that even if I'd taken the time to leave a well thought out logical argument, full of citations and historical illustrations, you would still be resistant to it. I'm weary of arguing with socialists because it's impossible to debate anything when you can't agree on definitions of terms (for instance I promise you we will never see eye-to-eye on the definition of property), and because I find it tiresome to defend principles like respect for individuals against people whose very ideology rejects such principles.

"My guess is that even if I'd taken the time to leave a well thought out logical argument, full of citations and historical illustrations, you would still be resistant to it."
IRONIC

"for instance I promise you we will never see eye-to-eye on the definition of property"

its something you control. If you don't understand that you are crazy.

"I find it tiresome to defend principles like respect for individuals against people whose very ideology rejects such principles."

its not an ideology its a set of material conditions conditions. If you can not defend your opinion you don't deserve one.

On top of that in that instance government is just a medium for fighting between strong businesses and the rest. They don't ever do anything for the good of everyone at the expense of an entire industry. Climate change is an example of this, oil companies are still the biggest in existence

I am one of the economic actors, but there is still much I do not know about the economy itself.

This post is very helpful.
thanks.

12687429-Follow-Me-Button-with-Hand-Shaped-Cursor-Stock-Photo-follow.jpg
Follow n upvote me
Regard @madcool

I follow you.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.31
TRX 0.11
JST 0.034
BTC 64332.82
ETH 3146.25
USDT 1.00
SBD 4.17