Skip to main content

The Capitalist/Communist Conundrum

By Saqib
I too was struck while reading Engels and Lenin on the apparent common underpinnings found in both the capitalist and communist ideologies. In Engels' writings, he discusses the parasitical nature of the bourgeois class whose monopoly on the means of production is cited as the chief reason for underdeveloped condition of the masses. What was conspicuously absent from his list of principles was the manner of governance which was to take shape under the perceived communist state. What democratic safeguards would be put in place to ensure that the bourgeois would not be replaced by another "dominant political class" capable of abusing the confiscated property and redirected wealth? Engels' hesitates to embrace the strategy of armed revolution and insists that "society" will seize the means of production, but a society represented by whom?

Ultimately, the principles as communism as spelled out by Engels suffer from the same fatal flaw that lies at the heart of the capitalist system. Namely, the assumption that the social order and financial system will be perpetuated through the "limitless expansion of production." Is a system based on unlimited growth on a finite world truly sustainable? Given the historical framing of these writings, in the mid-1800s in the age of the Industrial Revolution and the internal combustion engine, the claim that such a system will propel civilization forward was more than understandable. Ecological and environmental disasters, the peaking of the global oil supply, and rapid population growth of today suggests otherwise.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Purdue's Professional Revolutionary

By RK
In light of the discussion we had during our advisee meeting on Friday about being strategic in our means as critical scholars I was struck by the words of Lenin who emphasizes the role of the intellectual. He says, "The history of all countries shows that the working class, exclusively by its own effort, is able to develop only trade-union consciousness, i.e., it may itself realize the necessity for combining in unions, for fighting against the employers and for striving to compel the government to pass necessary labor legislation, etc. The theory of socialism, however, grew out of the philosophic, historical representatives of the propertied classes, the intellectuals." (pg. 74) This idea of the bourgeois socialist intelligentsia as an instrument of raising consciousness and fomenting dissent is an ideal one I am sure but in contemporary times we, the academics, forming a substantial part of the "intellectual elite", occupy a unique position which forces us into &
6 comments
Read more

Echoing Malcom

By Saqib
Reading Malcolm X's speeches, it is clear that he points to a historical trend in the process of obtaining independence from tyranny. In other words, history shows that people must be committed to overhauling the system and prepared to sacrifice for a great cause. The trouble comes in overcoming the anesthetization of the natural impulse that people have to change their surroundings. I feel that this is incredibly difficult in the modern world when entire industries have been created for the sole purpose of distraction and self-indulgence. Has that impulse changed? Is it still there? Sometimes I think that when people become so self-absorbed and ignorant of rampant injustice, they will only react when its too late. For instance, there have always been economic disparities but public anger only sets in when their houses are foreclosed and savings wiped out. Revolution then becomes the last refuge of the hopeless. Is there any point to calling for revolution when the only precursor t
2 comments
Read more