Communism

[Ed Note: A view away from war]

Recently, the alternative media have been writing remarkably much about Communism, always in a negative sense. When the main stream media (MSM) suddenly start writing a lot about something, I always become alert. What do they want us to believe now. What narrative is being forced on us next. I have developed a kind of propaganda detector. And it now also strikes a chord with the alternative media when it comes to Communism. What do these alternative media want to foist on us?

Before I get into the substance of it, let me also point out another example of the same phenomenon. I know that the many people already have their opinions fixed. Communism is always wrong in their eyes. They will not want to hear anything else. The same is the case with Islam and migration. But the phenomenon of ‘us’ having something forced upon us is also the same. Migration has become THE problem, but is it?

The strange thing is that people who say they are awake and see through ‘the game’ and ‘the system’ apparently distrust only the MSM. They don’t see the game of the alternative media. They are not critical of parties that might as well be controlled opposition. No alarm bells go off for them, because those alternative media reflect what they have already had forced on them from the MSM.

Migration is a problem, but not THE problem. THE problem is that we are all being pitted against each other. We are being played off against each other so that we don’t pay attention to the real problems we have been facing for hundreds of years. Islam is not a problem just as soccer is not a problem. Hooligans are a problem just as terrorists posing as Muslims are a problem.

Of importance to this writing is that you are willing to look beyond your nose. That you are open to what I am pointing out and judge only after you have read and thought about it as neutrally as possible. That you recognize that all your life you have been subject to propaganda, the imposed lies about in this case Communism. That it is time for you to formulate your own opinion, to break free from the narrative.

What is Communism?

In the West people often rail against Communism because Capitalism would be better. But it depends on exactly what you mean by it. The West is a master at framing terms to suit them. Surely “Communism” in contemporary China is very different from what Communism was in the U.S.S.R. And what did Karl Marx actually have in mind.

Before we look at Marx, let me give an example of a product versus an implementation. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a fantastic product that can benefit humans tremendously. However, you can implement AI in such a way that it makes humans worse off. Technology helps humans advance, but humans abusing technology causes accidents. The problem is implementation.

Marx’s ideal was a society without exploitation, but historical implementations often emphasized state power rather than emancipation. Human beings have difficulty dealing with power and institutions eventually corrupt. This is the case with both Communism and Capitalism. Marx was a critic of capitalism and mainly analyzed why capitalism would undermine itself.

Anyone who wants to look at the West neutrally and objectively can see what is going on and understand what Marx was referring to. Communism is not a blueprint for a new system, but rather a roadmap to a system that serves the people rather than the other way around. And along the way we must realize that humans are evolving, because ultimately every system depends on us.

U.S.S.R. versus China

Marx described communism as a classless, stateless society in which means of production are collectively owned. In practice, different countries have interpreted this ideal in their own way. The U.S.S.R. as a centrally planned economy, strong state control and little room for market forces. China as a mix of socialist politics and capitalist economic mechanisms.

The U.S.S.R. did not last long, because with such an implementation, the economy eventually stalls, there is no innovation, and productive capacity declines. It took decades after the fall of the U.S.S.R. for Russia and the other countries to somewhat put their affairs back in order. The same goes for the people, as they too have had to reinvent themselves.

China, however, is on a very different path. Their approach is much more flexible and they respond to every situation and what is happening in the world. One great success is that China has lifted 800,000 Chinese out of poverty with their system. They call their Communism “Socialism with Chinese characteristics”. They are looking for a better and better working model for both the country and the people.

People opposed to Communism rightly condemn the implementation of oppression and centralization of power among a small elite that enriches itself while the people have to be satisfied with little. But does that implementation have to do with Communism or with man himself? Because then what about all these other systems? What about with religions? How about with corporations?

What about Capitalism?

Original Capitalism revolved around decentralized market forces, where competition and supply/demand created incentives for efficiency and innovation. But in the 20th and 21st centuries, this has shifted to a system where mega-corporations and monopolies dominate the market (Big Tech, Big Pharma, Big Finance). Government and big capital have become intertwined (lobbying culture, tax avoidance).

Labor and capital have become unbalanced; profits flow to shareholders, not to wages or investment in the real economy. This is no longer free market forces, but Corporatism; a symbiotic relationship between big business and the state, at the expense of small players and citizens. And it has not stopped there. Under Capitalism, poverty has actually grown in the West.

The gap between rich and poor has widened. Where once a family could live on one income, now two parents have to work to keep their heads above water. Children now go to daycare at two instead of being raised at home. This is just one example of a system in decline. The industrial revolution spawned modern slavery.

We are looking at the end days of the West as we looked at the end days of the U.S.S.R. The system has become unsustainable, and the small elite with power are frantically trying to maintain their position and keep the people down. But it no longer works because the people are ripe to get out from under the yoke. The Western economy is on the verge of collapse. We have to go to something new.

Now what?

I am an advocate of pragmatic Socialism. Not dogma, but a system that adapts to circumstances as China does. Collective interest first. Resources, infrastructure and basic needs (health care, education, housing) are not the plaything of market speculation, but managed by the state for the country and the people.

Market forces at the service of development. Private innovation is allowed, but must contribute to national goals. Limit extreme inequality. Taxes on speculation instead of labor. Individual citizens are allowed to prosper, but at the same time must demonstrably contribute to the whole. We must look for the best of both worlds and mitigate the disadvantages.

The challenge though is to keep government away from totalitarianism (control and censorship) and corruption, so this requires a huge cultural approach with education, communication and simple but clear regulations. You will need mechanisms in the system to prevent it from corrupting. And make no mistake that today’s Democracy is also heavily corrupted.

Once every few years the people get to cast their vote for their desired political elite who then implement policies in line with the wishes of their sponsors, the corporations. This is what Democracy looks like today and it is not a hair better than the Communism of the U.S.S.R. It is very important that the people be involved and have influence.

Meritocracy

China’s government emphasizes Meritocracy, which is a model of society in which each individual’s socioeconomic position is based on his or her merits. Thus, this does not directly involve the aptitude one has, but what one does with that aptitude. Other factors, such as ancestry, land or money ownership, race and gender should play no part in it.

Thus, in a Meritocracy, administrators (politicians) are also elected on the basis of their own abilities and knowledge and not through birth, marriage or tradition. One’s own efforts determine what position one can occupy in society. This model should not be enforced, but culturally secured. We could grow toward that. Actually, we are just ready for something new and a new growth model.

I am curious as a reader how you experience this essay. Whether you are open to broadening your view and thinking more deeply about these issues yourself. After all, we must be ready to reshape our society once the current system collapses. The signs of this have been visible for some time, it is only a matter of time. Everything is going to change, whether you want it to or not.

I do not advocate Communism, but like Marx, I have serious reservations about Capitalism. Man must pull himself out of the swamp by his hair. What system is going to help us do that? In which we must realize that each new system will also only be an intermediate step. It will still take millennia before man becomes somewhat civilized and does not think only of himself.

Marxism

Karl Marx’s ideas on Humanism and human development are a crucial but often underexposed part of his philosophy. His vision goes far beyond economics in “Das Kapital. Under Capitalism, man becomes alienated from his labor (indifferent wage slave), his fellow man (individual competition) and himself (apathetic number to the government).

Few will want to admit this, especially to themselves. But it applies even to the so-called entrepreneurs in the Western system, for they too are in fact a wage slave to the Tax Authority. Few realize that they are in fact simply on an assembly line. Everyone is on the same ladder and would like to climb up a rung, not realizing that they are trapped.

Marx advocated a society in which people cooperate freely and consciously, without exploitation. He believed that man reaches his full potential only when freed from economic oppression. In Capitalism, labor is a necessity for survival. For Marx, Communism is not an end point, but a starting point for true human development.

Liberalism preaches false freedom. Formal freedom (voting rights, property rights) means nothing if people are economically unfree. Real freedom requires material equality: access to education, health and leisure. AI and Robotization can provide plenty of free time, provided the effort benefits the people and not savvy investors who make the gap between rich and poor widen.

State Power

Marx did not want a dictatorship, but a world where labor is satisfying, people cooperate rather than compete, and everyone has access to art, philosophy and science. His Humanism is an invitation to change not only the system, but also how we see ourselves. The U.S.S.R. emphasized state power, not human emancipation. China, to my mind, is still on its way.

Buddhism sees covetousness as the cause of suffering. Capitalism leads man to greed for money. Both emphasize that material fixations remove man from his essence. Marx was a Westerner and thus viewed the world through a Western filter. He looked for the solution in the system, when in fact the solution lies with man himself. Yet a system may or may not help man.

The question is also whether a system is workable and useful for every culture. Where a strong culture will always try to maneuver the system according to its philosophy and ideology. Confucianism has overlap with Marxism but also differences. Confucius saw the state as an educator toward moral perfection while Marx distrusted the state and thought it should disappear.

Marx wanted freedom through struggle. Buddhism and Confucianism want freedom through harmony. What works well for China and what works well for the West. Is China implementing Marx’s Humanist philosophy or is it stuck in traditions and an intermediate form because money (and power) smells good anyway? What will the West do when the (social) system collapses?

Finally

Let’s face it, I am no expert. I write this for reflection, to encourage readers to do their own research and think more deeply about this. We have to do something. We need to move forward as a species on this planet. There is much to do and for that we need bright and free minds. We need to break free from dogmas, narratives and fixed beliefs.

This essay is not necessarily about Communism, but about a new world in which people can become, be and remain themselves. People are basically social when they feel free as well as safe, when they are not afraid, but experience meaning. Why would people want to make us afraid of Communism and Marxism, when we should already be afraid of Capitalism and Corporatism?

As if we have to choose between the two. It looks suspiciously like a divide and conquer game. In the West we have been inundated with negative things about China and Communism for so long, isn’t it time to start looking honestly at what is really true? Not that everything is so good in China now, but just assume that there has been more lying than truth. As with everything.

The essence of this essay is that we must learn to let go of everything and reinvent ourselves. This is as true for China as it is for the West. We are all on the move, each in our own way and at our own pace. This essay could be written much better than I have, but my invitation is for the reader to rewrite their own essay. We are all on the move.

Nico Cost