Lesson 10: The Communist Manifesto, Part 2

I hold weekly meetings for interested parties here in Hendersonville, NC. This is a synopsis from our 10th meeting.

Synopsis of Week 10 Meeting:

We continue The Communist Manifesto.

1. From the start, Marx lied, utilized generalizations, and preyed on grievances and sympathies (see Synopsis 9). The Communist Manifesto proceeds then in the next several paragraphs to build a narrative based on those errors and evils. This is the story of man’s economic and social progress, seen through the prism of static attitudes on human behavior and a disdain for reason, instead relying on emotion and evocative imagery (basically, sophistry).

According to Marx, the method of extracting labor for unearned profit is at the center of it all. The guilds exploited the craftsmen; the manufacturer pushed aside the guilds and exploited the specialized laborer; the industrial giant crushed the local entrepreneurial manufacturer and exploited further the laborer, dehumanizing him; and finally the global corporation absorbed the industrial giants into a gigantic pool of vacuity and inhumanity.

It’s a compelling story, ripped it seems from the pages of today’s Google News. Yet, if Marx said these things 160 years ago, and today we have the same complaint against “greedy capitalism,” where is the evolution of society that Hegel predicted and Marx exhorted? How did the revolution against capitalism fail?

In short, it was exploration and creative thinking, pushing European expansion to the New World and other regions. There are three basic elements which Marx, in his fervor, neglected (whether or not deliberately):

(a) Advances in medicine and healthcare delivery caused the population to soar. Thus, the establishment of larger entities to provide work for this labor force was not per se exploitation but a necessity. In keeping with certain laws of economic physics, it would have been unbearable for governments to employ too many soldiers or bureaucrats, or to extenuate a welfare state. The retention of slavery was also waning, the rights of free peoples having been spelled out in various documents and by certain philosophers. As to population limitation (eugenics, ZPG, etc), these notions had not come to any engaged and organized fruit. In truth, the ever-present danger of popular revolt led to the expansion of entrepreneurship, in everything from navigation to commerce.

(b) Freedom in Europe meant a distillation of the mind, and creativity abounded. As the population grew, inefficiencies in the marketplaces (even within tyrannies) became obvious. Invention soon sprang from its mother, necessity. Such improvements to daily living were encouraged by particular protections, including the contract and the patent. Technology advanced human society, and the economic engine of nations soon depended on who could develop the next big thing. As a result of demand, resources of all types were conscripted from the farthest corners of the Earth. Thus, navigation and commerce expanded not by the whim of concentrated piles of wealth but in direct relation to a free and fair market. Yes, capitalism was also refined by such ventures but as long as governments did not interfere, everyone benefited.

(c) The printing press, an entrepreneurial Hall of Famer, enabled formerly ignorant peasants to have their own Bible, read philosophy, spread pamphlets, and circulate news. This enriching of a growing population caused minds to open and hearts to sing. Ideas were spread easier by publishing. Mail service became the norm, letter-writing a new art form, the invoice a standard of business transaction. Credit was thus able to expand, creating wealth where none was before. A loan was as good as gold. Banking started to increase, and the transfer of property was established in greater stature by the mortgage.

These are only some of the highlights of human development between 1400 and 1850 which Karl Marx chose to omit from his historical dialectic.

2. Since Marx’s view of history was so stilted and static, the Victim-Oppressor-Savior triumvirate was essential for the success of The Communist Manifesto. Though capitalism triumphed, the utopian ideals could still fan the flames of frustration, class envy, and nationalism. Thus, the concept of larger entities swallowing smaller concerns fed into the conspiracy theory (basically) that capitalism was no more than an endless progression of exploitation and ruthlessness, ending when the biggest fish finally swallowed the next-biggest.

As previously discussed, Marx blamed Judaism for capitalism. Thus, according to Marxism, the Jew is always to be blamed for the collapse of any economic system that depends on big fish and smaller fish. The inequities of talent, outcome, and societal structure (for example, between men and women) are also a symptom of this universe. Simply, Marx took the natural and self-existent differences of life, and forged that certain human organizational constructs either caused or exacerbated these differences. The Christian religion, for example, Marx accused as aiding and abetting capitalism, and therefore the destruction of society.

In economic terms, the church facilitated societal inequities in countless ways. For example, tithing is not progressive and therefore does not care sufficiently for the poor, instead permitting those with more to keep what they have. The progressive tax system is a manifestation of this thinking. Should anyone, however, believe Marxism in this (or any other) regard has some meritorious ground on which to stand, it should be noted that a progressive tax or tithing system is corrupt and sinful, encouraging both coveting and stealing (it is no excuse that the organization is committing the sin, for it takes people to implement the organization’s policies).

The Communist Manifesto takes this methodology to an absurd extreme. When the Oppressor guild was destroyed by an incoming manufacturer, that guild moved to the Victim pile. By the time the historical process reached the level of global multinational, everyone but a fortunate few were Victims. It became a case of the 99% vs. the 1%, not a new concept or slogan.

But if the global multinational Oppressor is removed, the industrial giant, once a Victim of the global multinational, becomes itself the Oppressor. This reversal of exploitative relationships and machinations regressively continues until there are no more Victims and no more Oppressors. The revolution is therefore won. The victory is a state with no rulers but also, by design, no work ethic, no technology, no religious Law (Torah), a destroyed infrastructure, and other ills. Communism is thus to be viewed as a return to barbarism, crudity, and darkness. For when the revolution ends, and all are equal, any person who should dare to be an individual, an inventor, a builder, an entrepreneur, or an explorer shall either be subsumed by the mediocrity of nothingness, enslaved to the will of a dictatorship, or eliminated. Deviation in utopia is a crime.

3. The retention of capitalism is by Marx seen as by a police state. According to this way of thinking, in the police state, in order to keep the exploited happy, many pleasures are encouraged. Order is kept by force.

It should be obvious that, in many parts of the world , Marx’s view is correct. Military dictatorships and other tyrannies constantly monitor the population for dissent. Yet, it is almost always true that such repression takes place in collectivist, particularly Marxist, countries (I consider Sharia Law to be Marxist, not religious, ideology).

In contrast, where capitalism is the mainstay, happiness is a by-product of liberty, and order is most often self-imposed for the sake of keeping the peace. Where there is prosperity and/or liberty, riots do not often break forth. It takes an ideological rabble to protest wealth for its own sake, stirring up hatred and envy from those parts of society which may be neglected. It takes a committed radical element to overload a system of government for the goal of collapse and subsequent overthrow to power, the coup. In all such instances, the “grievance” is organized for mob power, and the Victim-Oppressor-Savior game is played to its fullest.

The game itself is known as “Communism vs. Fascism.” That is, the collectivist organizes protests and other vehicles to ostensibly deliver a message, the less coherent the better. Slogans become more important than facts. Buildings and parks are occupied as if a war is being waged, with individual battles (as for the Brooklyn Bridge). The communist wields the mob like a weapon, striking first here, then there. Collateral damage is expected and considered part of life (“oh well”). The police at first are ordered to remain peaceful, and to arrest only those most rowdy, destructive, or violent (these are often not the communist leaders but only patsies). As the communist taunts become unlimited and property destruction begins, the police are then given freer reign. Some of the police are by this time pent up, and some may go on a rampage, mainly from overwork but sometimes from a personality disorder. The communist media immediately broadcasts the plight of the downtrodden, and the public chimes in with compassion and sympathy. Cries of “Fascism!” are spread, and our peace-keepers are soon perceived to be the enemy.

The game ends in one of two ways: (a) some portion of the collectivist-driven mob is killed in a skirmish, scaring away most of the others, relieving the situation and retrieving the peace, or (b) the mob continues to grow until its size is unmanageable, thereafter being used to block food and energy deliveries, and finally to seize those in power and desecrate their bodies, leaving society in chaos and ruins. The first manner has been recently witnessed in America at Kent State. The second manner is a description of the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, and every other like these, as well as of the pogrom.

Next week: More than you ever wanted to know but without which cannot survive the future.