[1996sp:133]

This question <77|186> overall <132|134> KALISPEL: <57|144>.

Question 301: Thread 301

[133] KALISPEL: How to beat capitalism in less than 50 years. I enjoyed peace's ideas on how to beat capitalism in less than 50 years, however I have many unanswered questions to what he/she said. It, although, did get me to think more about the notion of beating capitalism.

Peace could not find the phrase in the introduction to Marx's Capital. It is the last paragraph which states: It is most unlikely that capitalism will survive another half-century because of the crises which have occurred since 1914. It is most probable, moreover, that Capital and what it stands for-namely a scientific analysis of bourgeois society which represents the proletariat's class consciousness at its highest level-will in the end prove to have made a decisive contribution to capitalism's replacement by a classless society of associated producers.

First peace states that the individual cannot transcend capitalism. I agree with this statement, but not completely. Of course you can never break out of capitalistic social relations, but you can “save yourself.” Marx reveals many of the crimes involved under capitalism such as exploitation and human commodities and the like. These negative aspects can be eliminated through transcending class states such as that of the welfare and the working class.

For example, Joe is a factory worker and must work 50-65 hours per week to keep his job. It is hard labor and he doesn't have much energy left over to really enjoy life. He has become a human commodity, or in other words, the typical every day wage slave. He is not able to pursue intrinsic interests and his growth as a human being are stifled. Few would argue with this.

Another example, Sally is a mother of 3 and is on welfare. She doesn't have a car that works and can barely buy food and pay rent. Her entertainment and ability to pursue intrinsic values is also greatly stifled.

Billy Bob, is a capitalist. He worked hard at a lucrative job and saved up lots of cash. He invested his money and makes a return of 15% a year. This gives him a salary above that of Sally, and Joe. What does Billy have that Sally and Joe do not. He has both the time and the means to pursue his interests as a human being. He has broken out of the coercive powers of capitalism. He can do what he wants whenever he wants and has enough money to do most anything within reason. Billy Bob may not have truly transcended capitalistic social relations, but why would he care? He has his cake and is eating it too. Morally, this may be a bad approach, but in Capitalism it is rob, or be robbed.

I do not at all understand what you mean by saying that freedom is not necessary for happiness. How can a person be happy under coercive powers? If I love to make music and I am a street sweeper am I truly happy? Maybe not completely unhappy, but if you are allowed to choose what you want to do with your time you will, or course, find more happiness. If I have a talent for music and due to capitalism I must search for the buck and do something that turns me into a commodity, how can I be truly happy. I am not a philosopher, but I can see that any kind of “prison” does not lead to happiness. To me, it seems fundamental. Why isn't the capitalism free? He doesn't have to go to work. He is not under coercive powers like his boss yelling at him. He is able to do most of what he wishes as long as it isn't killing people or something crazy like this.

On the one hand everyone can say choose this, choose that, it's all up to you, but most people never break the coerciveness of capitalism. How many people love to go to work every day? If they do not love it when why do they do it. They have to. Likewise, the capitalist can go to the Bahamas one weekend and produce a music album the next by choice. I believe it is immoral to be a capitalist, but as I said before it is rob or be robbed. It is also immoral to let someone rob from me and not do anything about it, also. It's a paradox, but as Marx said blame the system, not the captialist.

Lastly, I think it would do many of the marxists a lot of good if they became capitalists. Why? First, they understand the nature of how capital operates. Secondly, how else can a difference be made at all. The “establishment” known as the ruling class are not going to let a bunch of discontent Marxists overthrow the system they rule. Powerful men (power=cash) who have the means and time need to band together and change the system. The slaves and serfs didn't like their systems much, but what good did it do them. Changes must come from the top down, thus some Marxists need to go to the top and start working on it. It may seem immoral to the Marxist to pursue cash by becoming a capitalist, but I think it is just as immoral to allow someone to exploit you as a commodity your whole life. I believe that to beat the system you must first show that you have mastered it. Fighting a system you have no control over, or in, in my estimation, does little good. It is not probable that the world will be converted to marxism and capitalism has proved how easy it is to manipulate the masses. I believe we are talking about a change that will take too many lifetimes. It'll be like Star Trek the next generation before there is this complete social consciousness when everyone is treated equally etc.

Peace, I am interested in what your notion of happiness is and I want to know how to live in a capitalistic society until it either self-destructs or is overturn. There must be some empowering strategies someone can take. Presently, I believe that the best thing to do is become a capitalist and work at bringing about social consciousness of these issues. I may not be able to change the world, but maybe I can make a “mark” towards a better society by becoming involved in the lives of others. If I let the capitalist rob me bleed me and pilpher me than what have I become?

Note: Rick Majerus advised Keith Van Horn about the money he would be giving up if he stayed another year. Van Horn decided to stay at the U with an insurance policy of about a million if he got hurt. Discussing the issue Majerus said something interesting. He said, “Money can buy happiness and if anyone thinks this is not so then they have never had it and are naive.” I believe this notion that money doesn't buy happiness is one of the “songs” sung by the capitalist to keep himself in ruling power.