critical-mass.net

On Neo-Liberalism.

The capitalist mode of production began its career in the hands of merchant traders and capital took the form of Commercial Capital. Money was used to commission, purchase, transport and sell commodities from wherever they were produced to wherever they could be sold. Warehousing, market stalls and shipping were the most visible indicators. Merchant traders became rich and socially influential.

Later an industrial revolution occurred and capital began to be used to manufacture commodities on a large scale and on a continuous basis. Industrial Capital began to dominate socio-economic activity, it’s owners became the wealthiest and most influential. Factories, mines and large-scale farms were the most visible indicators.

The accumulated profits generated during those two stages accelerated a third stage in which loan or finance-capital became the most dominant form. Accumulated money was loaned at interest, to other capitalists, (merchants, industrialists, speculators) and governments. Banks, finance-houses and stock-exchanges, became the most visible manifestations of this particular stage.

Economic strategies.

Each of these stages had its own internal evolution and had different effects upon the general social and international relations within which they operated, but all grew absolutely, whilst their relative dominance shifted. The intellectual strategies of these interconnected stages appeared within economic theory. Mercantile, protectionism dominated early economic discourse and was replaced by liberal ‘free-market’ thinking when industry dominated governments.

The period of ‘free-trade’ capitalism led to freedom for the strongest capitalists (and capitalist countries) to dominate the weakest. Results! ‘Enclosures’, ‘Colonialism’ and ‘Imperialism’. Wars over access to essential raw materials and markets were triggered – including two world wars. Furthermore, technical advances in capitalist production techniques led to large-scale unemployment and potential (as well as actual) uprisings and revolutions. So after the Second World War a modification of free-market economics was proposed by John Maynard Keynes and was accepted by most European and Western governments.

This Keynesian economic strategy involved governments playing an active and leading role in economic and social affairs by regulating, stimulating and directing economic activity along with promoting social welfare programmes. Governments began to control capitalists. This welfare-capitalism model of economic theory and practice appeared to solve some of the problems associated with ‘free-for-all’ capitalism, but it hadn’t really.

A new phenomena occurred in which taxes on capital, profits and wages were increased to pay for this governmental activity. However, competition continued and in the leading capitalist countries, profits slumped, capital was increasingly exported and large-scale unemployment returned.

Financial de-regulation.

The drain on profits led to some economists and politicians resurrecting free-market liberal ideas – but in a new form – hence a new ‘liberalism’ or neo-liberalism. This involved free-market capitalism with new (ie neo) twists. The continued domination of finance-capital meant that that particular sector was able to persuade politicians such as Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher (et al) to introduce de-regulation of banking and financial transactions; to hold down wages and salaries by limiting trade union bargaining; and by allowing finance-capitalists to purchase public utilities, (eg, gas, electricity, water, telephones, postal services etc.,) at bargain prices.

Consequently wealth for the rich upper and middle-classes soared, particularly in Europe and North America whilst many working people living there sank into relative and absolute poverty. However, the advocates of neo-liberal capitalism were not fully satisfied by this mega re-distribution of social wealth upward to the elite. They wanted to secure it. Working people might get sufficiently upset by poverty and precarious conditions, to elect governments pledged to end this neo economic/financial theft. So in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, some elites invented a means to prevent this.

The T.T.I.P. Of a bureaucratic iceberg.

Neo-liberal theorists, financiers, economists and politicians collaborated in writing trade agreement documents, such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, (TTIP) which would allow, private companies to prevent governments from taking any action which damaged or diminished their profitability. A future of capitalists controlling Governments.

Governments will be compelled to pay taxpayers money to compensate for losses incurred to capitalists by local or national government actions. Revealingly, these trade agreements are not available for public scrutiny. Nor are the special courts of arbitration open to the public. Secrecy and elite-only access to these machinations of the capitalist and pro-capitalist elite are strictly enforced.

Financial, economic, political and social power already resides in the hands of the capitalist elite and further bureaucratic forms are being used against the ordinary people and their representatives. The capitalist real-world god is still profit, but their New Testament is now neo-liberalism and the Cardinals and Pontiffs of capital are now the owners/controllers of ‘too-big-to-fail’ corporations. Consequently, neo-liberalism has transformed ordinary people’s rights into the modern equivalent of dependent serfs and peasants. That may seem bad enough, but ecologically, there is more.

Profit-based production and consumption, increases commodity volumes and reduces labour costs. The manufacturing processes of commodities, also produces an increase in pollution, ecological damage and climate-change crisis. It also – via neo-liberal financed automation and artificial intelligence – reduces the numbers and pay of people employed who are then unable to purchase this increased production.

Over-production, stagnation and social strife.

Existing capitalist relative-overproduction is now increasing toward a 21st century generalised over-production crisis, leading to further economic stagnation before economic collapse and social strife. Yet a mixture of ignorance and self-interest means practically all pro-capitalists are blind to such unresolvable contradictions waiting to explode among their countries citizens.

Since these elites, dominate, economics, finance, education, science, politics, media and law, and are blind to the contradictions at play, ordinary citizens are not aware of them either. So those who suffer most are left struggling to understanding why. Thus leaving them open to being persuaded to blame other victims of the same socio-economic system. Divide and rule is daily being promoted in the hope of diverting attention away from the economic system capitalists promote and defend.

Applying neo-liberal theory and practice to 20th century capitalism has enabled a further enrichment of the elite by a further impoverishing the non-elite.

Roy Ratcliffe (January 2020.)

Superficially, it seems that the recent targeted assassination of Iran’s Qassem Suleimani, authorised by the American President, is just another example of Donalds’ schizophrenic type mentality. However, his role in this act of killing as well as his presence in office is a symptom of a much larger crisis. One which reaches deep into the history of the capitalist mode of production. It is a history that orbits around oil precisely because capitalisms cycle of production, distribution and consumption completely depends upon it. The Iranian missiles fired in retaliation and the one bringing down a civilian aircraft demonstrate how quickly tensions can escalate.

But it should not be forgotten that interference by the elites of dominant capitalist countries in the affairs of oil-rich countries has been continuous since industrialised production and transport switched from coal and steam to oil and electricity. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that for almost a century, rival blocs of capitalist elites have continued manipulation and rivalry in countries such as; Iraq, Saudi, Iran, Algeria, Libya, Nigeria, Congo, Venezuela etc. In the process using, abusing and even killing, those who stand in the way of ensuring reliable oil supplies.

This history is crucially important to understand. In particular, the people of Iran have an extremely negative experience of UK and USA interference in their countries. During the early 20th century, Iran and it’s oil was controlled by Britain and British Petroleum (BP) whose shareholders became mega rich whilst most Iranians remained desperately poor. Attempts by Iran to gain control of their own resources were constantly thwarted. A regime headed by a Shah was eventually put in charge via a UK and USA manipulated coup.

However, that CIA/MI5 preferred regime, did not sufficiently benefit the masses. Eventually a rebellion deposed him. Iran became dominated by Islamic fundamentalists, headed by Ayattola Khomeini. Religious ideology replaced secular ideology and most secular-minded people were physically eliminated as agents of western capitalism or soviet communism. Iranians were told (and many believed) that Islamic law would create better governance than any Soviet or US backed examples could offer.

Western capitalist systems elites – mainly those in the UK and USA – remained livid at loosing control of the huge and highly profitable oil reserves in Iran. Ever since, Iranian and USA/UK elites have been involved in a hot and cold war with each other. Tragically, hostilities may now be heading toward a new intensity. Further resentment by Iranian people (and other Arab people’s) to the West’s interference in the Middle East, is with regard to the role played by Britain and the USA, in the establishment and maintenance of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land, towns and villages since the 1940’s.

Furthermore, when America, Britain and France supported Iraq’s Saddam Hussain with arms and resources in the Iraq/Iran war, this was seen as the West using Iraq to achieve regime change in Iran. But there is an interesting double irony. The reasons many Shia Iranians chose an Islamised state – all those decades ago – was because the secular examples promoted in the region by the West were so consistently bad. However, when Sunni Islam created it’s own alternative version of fundamentalism, via the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood (1928) as interpreted by Hasan al Banna, later by Savyid Qutb and redefined by the Islamic State of ISIL/IS IS, this development was vigorously opposed by the Iranian regime.

Part of the irony is that the leading Iranian organiser of successful opposition to ISIS and it’s geographical Caliphate was none other than – Qassem Suleimani – the General assassinated on the authority of Donald Trump! Having allowed the Turkish version of patriarchal Islam, headed by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, to disperse and kill the northern Syrian Kurdish fighters against ISIS, the US president has had another fighter against ISIS bumped off in Iraq.

Given that ISIS type Islamism is supposed to be the USA’s main target for eradication this may seem strange. However, it is not elite male killing of rivals and female oppression in general, or Islamic versions of these two inhuman practices, that the West’s own male-dominated elites object to. How could they since they clearly indulge in versions of these patriarchal practices themselves? What they really object to is any threat to the control of what they see as ‘their’ (sic) sources of wealth and profit.

Incidentally, the young people in Iran only six months ago were demonstrating against Shia fundamentalist rule in Iran and by implication also against Sunni fundamentalist rule. This was a welcome groundswell. Youth and women struggling against poverty and patriarchy in the middle-east, undoubtedly saw that their oppression comes from the western elites as well as their own Arabic religious elites.

Yet it is a well established lesson from history that when the population of a country feels sufficiently threatened by the armed forces of another country, they suspend internal divisions for the duration of the threat. In addition, many expect retaliation for acts perpetrated against their own side. This was the case in the two-world wars of the 20th century, where deep divisions in the UK and the USA were suspended between 1939 and 1945. Almost everyone rallied to support their respective Allied governments. The same occurred in Germany and Italy on the Axis side of that war for control of markets and resources.

So it will not be surprising if many of the dissatisfied Iranian women and youth now feel duty bound – not only to object to the American assassination of their (sic) Iranian general – but call for retaliatory action. And not just for this latest act: but also for the poverty and suffering caused by years of USA orchestrated trade embargo against them. Just which sides elites the Iranian dissatisfied feel are the bigger villains in this whole sorry mess remains to be seen. After a century of western interference in the Middle East, it may well be the West’s – yet again – and hostilities continue.

Roy Ratcliffe (January 2020)

On Anti – capitalism.

The first 10 guides in this series, provided many reasons for questioning the existence of the capitalist mode of production. Guide 10, outlined the many failed attempts to moderate capitalisms worst extremes. But early 20th century economic hardship and social unrest, also led to firm conclusions that capitalism had become an existential problem for working people. Large-scale movements developed, proposing to end capitalism.

Indeed, a number of ‘revolutions’ did occur, particularly in Russia and China, but control of the main means of production always remained with elites. In reality these ‘alternative‘ societies were state-controlled forms of economic exploitation. Workers simply became state employed wage-slaves. When these ‘alternatives’ collapsed, most workers became wage-slaves for capitalists again.

Those ‘state-capitalist’ failures revealed that going beyond capital requires; a) a thorough understanding of the capitalist mode of production; b) knowing what really makes a post-capitalist society possible. c) awareness of what actually needs revolutionising.

Anti-capitalist leaders/led of the 20th century, lacked this basic a, b, c. Yet knowledge of (a) had been pioneered by Adam Smith, David Ricardo and Karl Marx. Here, an important distinction needs to be made between Marx and ‘Marxism‘. Marx, after reading what many ‘followers’ wrote, declared that; he was ‘not a Marxist’.

Nevertheless, throughout the 20th and early 21st centuries, many Leninists, Trotskyists and Maoists, still claimed to be Marxists without fully understanding Marx’s revolutionary-humanism. Many pro-capitalist intellectuals criticise present day ‘Marxists’ but demonstrate their own ignorance of Marx by assuming these have understood Marx.

With regard to (b), the most potential developments are the creation of large-scale, non-profit, public service organisations. Despite the alleged superiority and efficiency of private ownership of social production, capitalists have found it necessary to construct huge examples of the opposite.

Even the most enthusiastic pro-capitalists would not advocate completely privatising the following: armies, navies, air forces, police forces, political and legal institutions, local government agencies, schools, universities, health services and road transport systems. The reason is obvious. Funds for these services would be reduced drastically if citizens only purchased them when needed.

It is a frequently overlooked fact by capitalists and pro-capitalists that without the existence of large-scale, non-profit public services institutions, modern capitalist societies would simply collapse. Without these institutions, unemployment would also increase exponentially. Thousands of white and blue-collar workers now staffing them – at all levels – would be jobless.

The fact is, that in the 20th and 21st centuries, a capitalistic private, profit-making sector of the capitalist mode of production can no longer survive without the multiple supporting buttresses of non-profit public services. These non-profit forms are necessary to ensure that transport/waste disposal infrastructure, national security requirements, organisational and personal education/welfare needs, all function sufficiently for modern societies to survive. The private profit economic sector is now absolutely dependent upon a solid foundation of non-profit public institutions.

Moreover most of the services listed above would be essential for a non-capitalist future once the hierarchical appointment structures and management teams within them were democratised. It would be foolish to condemn an excellent set of organisations (eg schools, universities, hospitals, fire services, etc.) just because a small section of those staffing them are currently patriarchal, sexist, elitist, arrogant, self-serving, dishonest, incompetent and overpaid. There would obviously be a need to respond to future changing requirements and to replace the current hierarchical structures, with genuinely democratic and egalitarian ones.

Economic and technical developments, created by millions of skilled and unskilled workers, have produced enormous amounts of surplus-product and value from their combined efforts. This surplus in turn has enabled the staffing of varied and extensive non-profit public services. For over 60 years these non-profit models have proved sustainable and effective in delivering the basic needs of modern citizens. Most represent valuable, if incomplete and still woefully under-resourced, prototypes for a future mode of production not distorted by individual profit-seeking and hierarchical greed. In the 20th century, capitalism gave birth to its future replacement.

This brings us to point (c). What elements of the capitalist mode of production need to be abandoned? First of all private or elite control of the main means of production needs to be ended – in all its various, neo-liberal and authoritarian forms! This is because the ceaseless elite desire to accumulate individual power, surpluses and profit, not only fuels inequality, injustice, trade wars, ill health and global pollution, but also widespread ecological destruction and accelerated climate change. These symptoms of social and biological disintegration are inevitable while elites determine the pattern, the purpose, the pace and the location of production, distribution and exchange.

NB. In the entire history of the human species, capitalism is the only mode of production which has the capability (and elite incentive) to destroy the foundations of humanity itself. Pro-capitalist economic, financial and political classes now have the industrial and commercial means, to globally degrade or destroy; people, water, air, soil, seas, lakes, rivers; and to eliminate vital biological species (trees, bees, microbial soil balance and multifarious forms of sea life) upon which we depend. The existence of humanity and the other life-forms needed, requires that elite control of the modern means of production is replaced by genuine and direct community control.

Instead, the 20th century revolutionary uprisings, noted above, demonstrated that anti-capitalism, in the sectarian, elitist forms of Leninism, Trotskyism, Stalinism and Maoism were authoritarian dead ends. In or out of power, such elitist forms failed humanity completely. Apart from a few remaining members such groups have been abandoned. However, a healthy strand of revolutionary-humanist ideas that transcend sectarian ones have survived those 20th century aberrations.

As noted in Guide 8, Revolutionary-Humanist understanding and practices exist and are available. They offer critical, self-critical and humane responses to capitalism’s existential threats to humanity and life in general. Unlike, religion, nationalism and political affiliation – concepts that intentionally promote human disunity – revolutionary-humanist ideas actually reflect 20th and 21st century global realities and the future integrated needs of our species.

Roy Ratcliffe (December 2019)

On Reformism.

Almost from its earliest beginnings, supporters of the capitalist mode of production, recognised its many benefits to them, whilst it’s huge downsides were recognised by the majority. When capitalism reached the industrial revolution stage, it’s ‘dark satanic’ failings became all too obvious. Pollution, poverty and pestilence for the masses, profit, privilege and prestige for the few. This extreme contrast led to various political tendencies proposing slight changes to the system (known as reforms) to reduce some of these negative outcomes.

The enlightened elite perspective became; Pollution yes – but not too much; Exploitation yes – but not excessive; Poverty yes, – but not starvation; Unemployment yes – but not permanent; Work related accidents and diseases yes – but with compensation and medication; Commercial warfare yes – but diplomatically moderated. Eventually, clean water and air acts; minimum wages legislation; legal entitlement to benefits (unemployment, child and housing); were implemented – as reforms – along with United Nations peacekeeping institutions.

The list could go on, but the reader will undoubtedly understand that even those limited 20th century reforms were mostly ineffective, that the symptoms noted have increased and also become global. The reason is simple. Modes of production controlled by elites can only be permanently reformed when the reforms benefit a majority of the elite. All others, particularly those which reduce the profits and wealth going to the elite, will be resisted, ignored, undermined, countered or exceptions granted.

Revealingly, the two world wars, (1914 – 1918 and 1939 – 45) noted in previous guides had their origins in the rivalry between capitalist nation blocs for control of markets and sources of raw materials. Whatever other rationalisations for these wars are offered in history books, (fictional and non-fictional) the nature of capitalist profit seeking, with industrial levels of production, required ever more markets to sell mass produced goods and ever more raw materials/energy sources to manufacture them. Despite the inauguration of the United Nations (peace-keeping) Organisation, armed conflict between capitalist economies for direct possession or proxy control of these resources, was (and still is) inevitable.

Nevertheless, between 1900 – 1945, after economic downturn, financial collapse, the two world wars and two major revolutions (Russia and China), a ‘new deal’, ‘citizen welfare’ section of the western capitalist elite reasoned that, ‘we must give the workers reforms or they will give us revolution’. Post second world war reforms and a reconstruction-driven boom period followed. Meanwhile the vanguard-led revolutions in the east, had turned into the surreal nightmares of Leninism, Stalinism and Maoism. That kind of authoritarian controlled revolution (plus the Fascist kind) was rejected by most western working people, white-collar and blue. Welfare reforms to capitalism seemed preferable and US lend-lease, defibrillated, European capitalism’s failing heart.

With the fear of revolution gone, the pro-capitalist financial elites of the later Thatcher/Reagan post-war era, guided the less profitable welfare capitalism into its neo-liberal phase. Thus humanity entered the ‘I’m leaving on a jet plane’ period of globalisation with its accelerated negative effects. Added to the ones listed above, were climate change, polluted seas and large-scale ecological destruction. Half a century after destroying much of the world with bombs, capitalism and its supporters were at it again – this time by excessive production, commerce and transport.

So capitalism has faced humanity with another existential crisis and surprise, surprise, it’s supporters have reintroduced the idea of reforming it!

Having progressively abandoned welfare capitalism as too costly and with a tame working and middle-class class hooked on the entitlement ethos of the right to consume ever more commodities, streaming services and holidays abroad, some pro-capitalist elites now suggest reforming capitalism into a eco-friendly condition. Green ‘growth’ is the latest mirage dangled in front of the influential middle-classes and those workers still entranced by conspicuous consumption, spin and deception. The hope is that capitalism, with some clever technological adjustments, can carry on mass producing far into the future.

This new, liberal extinction prevention vision for the future, is based on the following. That capitalism can continue creating profitable investment returns, with guaranteed salaries and pensions for the middle-classes, providing it churns out bio-degradable goods and services, using renewable energy sources and with tireless, non-waged, non-striking robots staffing factories, hospitals and care homes. When the rare minerals and earth elements required to manufacture such ‘brave new world’ technologies run out, then an even more deluded section of the middle-class (scientific) community are keen to send robotic space vehicles to dig out whatever is needed on the Moon, Mars or passing asteroids.

Currently, the capitalist systems advocates claim that it cannot afford decent wages, hospitals, schools, homes and care homes for everyone needing them now, let alone when the extra costs of producing future eco-friendly and non-polluting methods of mass production, transportation, consumption and refuse disposal are added to the balance sheets. And that is assuming capitalist industries of the future will do everything pollution free, regardless of the negative effects this will have on their profit levels. [Their past track record, even when heavily regulated, would suggest otherwise.] To my mind, imagining a future green Capitalism, with eco-friendly production methods is no further advanced intellectually than some early childhood musings, (rather than questioning), when told that the moon was made of green cheese.

Yet dozens of professors of science and astrophysics are jetting around the globe conferencing and planning future billion dollar (or Pounds or Euros) rocket propelled expeditions to excavate and return a few kilos of extraterrestrial, mineral-rich dirt. They seem to think this would be an economically viable activity for a humanity already on the verge of mass extinctions and ecological collapse.

I suggest that campaigns to reform capitalism, unless capable of triggering an anti-capitalist revolution, are nothing more than pie in the sky distractions. Advocating green-capitalism, is also an oxymoronic concept revealing that its advocates have sadly failed to understand how and why the capitalist economic and financial system of production will continue to dangerously mutate unless physically stopped.

Roy Ratcliffe (December 2019)

On the Nation-State.

The term ‘state’ (or nation-state) is generally used to designate the various institutions, (parliaments, assemblies, legal bodies and enforcement agencies) created to govern countries. In every mode of production, representatives of the dominant class, along with their ideas, dominate the institutions of the state.

That is why nation-states are not neutral. Just as the Aristocracy (and their views) dominated Aristocratic state institutions, now the Capitalists (and their ideas) dominate the capitalist nation-state institutions.

States have numerous formal and informal connections to the citizens who live within their national boundaries. These connections operate through state laws, institutional practices and enforcement agencies. These links can extend to ex-Colonial acquisitions and past Imperial annexations, thus becoming broad and deep.

This mix of nation-state features represent a complex and often confusing interconnected network. However, the modern states relationships with its citizens can best be understood by considering two of its essential features. First; its sources of income and expenditure; Second: its political structure.

Sources of income.

It is obvious, that state institutions are not self-funding nor do they generate income by the production and sale of commodities. The states employees spend but do not economically earn or produce anything of non-state value. They obtain income from four primary sources; taxes and duties (which they impose), loans (which they attract) from individuals, groups, businesses and ‘aid’ from foreign governments.

However, the taxes of citizens pay for the bulk of the nation-states public buildings, its staff salaries, pensions and the grants they make. Payments, in the form of subsidies, benefits, grants, wages, salaries and interest payments, are re-distributions of money collected predominantly from citizens taxes, or from grants, loans and aid.

This bottom-up funding relationship between citizens and the modern state, gives rise to the idea that the states employees (bureaucrats, politicians, law enforcement agents etc.) ought be serving the interests of those who pay their salaries and pensions – ie the citizens!

So it often comes as a shock to tax-paying citizens when state employees are seen to be primarily serving their own narrow interests. Moreover, shock frequently spills over to anger when politicians and state bureaucrats use the states legal and penal powers against citizens who demonstrate against the policies of the states elite employees.

The spectacle of police using weapons such as batons, tear gas, pepper spray, Tazers and water cannons against peaceful protesters, can be a startling revelation to those, who through their taxes, have paid for the weapons used against them. The fact that they have contributed to the salaries of the uniformed ‘enforcers‘ wielding them, can also be a bone of contention when protesters are ‘kettled’, assaulted or imprisoned.

Furthermore, the fact that protesters taxes also go toward the salaries, expenses and pensions of the elite who ordered their rough ‘public order’ treatment can also be a shocking realisation. For in normal human transactions, if someone pays for a service, or contributes to the salaries of state employees they expect the needs of those who pay to be met.

Indeed, if we consider health and education services, we generally do get something we need for paying our taxes. The service in question may be above or below the value of tax-payer contributions, but this is still a ‘normal’ two-sided economic exchange. Citizens pay and normally expect to receive. That’s the economic form of social reciprocity. However, as we shall see parts of the nation-state are not a normal expression of social or economic activity.

Politics and the State.

Indeed, with regard to the state, there is frequently no reciprocity. Some state employees get money for doing nothing beneficial for the taxpayer. Others get extremely high salaries for judging and punishing unfortunate tax-paying victims of the capitalist system. Politicians and state officials get high salaries for doing nothing else but talk to each other – some for their entire careers! They also spend considerable tax-payer money on themselves.

When the political structures within nation-states are examined, the source of the huge contradictions mentioned above are revealed. Although the state takes money from practically everyone it can, it clearly does not serve everyone equally. Since the capitalist class, amasses great concentrations of wealth, it’s members can be (and influence) the employees of the state and elected politicians. Lobbying by industry, commerce and banking is more powerful, extensive and effective than any other sector of society.

Moreover, a majority of the officials ensconced in government (including those in Parliaments Senates and Assemblies, etc.) are drawn from the same groups who occupy elite positions in industry, commerce and banking – often from the same family. Therefore, political ‘lobbying’ is overwhelmingly the elite lobbying the elite on behalf of the elite.

This helps explain the way the taxes are apportioned (or eased) and spent. It also explains the political ‘revolving door’ of elite job swapping between finance, industry, commerce and government. The upper layers of the governing elite live in a wealth-saturated bubble funded by the ordinary citizens.

The real purpose of the nation-state elite is to perpetuate their own hierarchical positions at the top of the wealth pyramid whilst maintaining high levels of wealth inequality. When needing votes, they frequently employ a mantra of serving the public or national interests, but first and foremost they are serving their own interests.

In this regard, note the numerous examples around the globe of politicians and governmental officials deploying the most ruthless means of suppressing their citizens legitimate protests against austerity and poverty.

In practically every country, on every continent, the handling of the multi-dimensional crises of 21st century capitalism has provoked protest and demonstrations by the working, (and increasingly) middle-class, poor. Legitimate concerns have been met everywhere by uniformed men administering violent suppression and punishment simply for challenging the systems crumbling legitimacy.

Globally, politics amounts to – the nation-state versus the ordinary people. Why? The capitalist and pro-capitalist elite maintain order – with calculated violence – because it is their nation-state and their social order.

Roy Ratcliffe (November 2019)

On Alienation and Addiction.

Previous beginners guides focused upon the economic structure and the ecological effects of capitalist societies. However, there are effects classed as emotional and psychological problems, which are actually bio-chemical body reactions to various stresses caused by the current socio-economic system. It has previously been pointed out that under capitalism the mass of workers have been separated from control of the main means of economic production and from the content and value they produce at work. This forced separation (or alienation) from a fundamental self-affirming form of human activity is a source of emotional upset and frustrations.

In general, species put as much physical and mental effort into securing their means of survival (food and shelter) as are necessary. The stop and start of this ‘necessary’ work was originally under direct individual or community control. Production stopped when enough had been produced. The documentary TV series ‘Tribe‘ fronted by Bruce Parry, illustrated that this pattern still existed in numerous pre-capitalist modes of production during the late 20th century. However, under systems of exploitation, such as capitalism, collective control of production was transferred to a separate class of owners/managers who determine what is enough. Furthermore, the general type and intensity of work for capitalist production, has become unnatural, repulsive and alienating.

Working for capital invariably involves long hours, stress, exhaustion, repetition, boredom, and often bodily harm. Working for capitalists has often become something to be individually endured rather than collectively enjoyed. Furthermore, even learning under capitalism is frequently stressful, depressing and isolating. It produces anxiety. Finding careers, jobs and a home for working people involves stressful competition. Conversely, lack of work under capitalism is also stressful, boring, demeaning and unhealthy. Capitalist domination of socio-economic activities has introduced multiple forms of ill-health, estrangement and alienation.

These numerous forms of alienation/competition/stress, create, resentment, anger, violence, intolerance, depression, illness and even suicides. Such symptoms effect all classes of capitalist societies, although the capitalist and pro-capitalists are compensated for what they endure. The symptoms noted above have spawned a whole range of professional workers (psychologists, psychiatrists, councillors, doctors) trained to treat the various symptoms as individual shortcomings, requiring 12 (or more) steps. Yet stress, emotional problems and illnesses are clearly more than individual phenomena in capitalist societies.

Nevertheless, when addictions are considered, the fundamental alienating contradictions and stresses at the heart of the capitalist mode of production are usually ignored. Many are classed as forms of individual physical or mental ‘weakness’. Gambling, mobile phones, computer games and shopping all have their share of allegedly ‘weak’ willed addicts. Even hobbies, sports training and religious sect membership can be addictive for some people. Is it not becoming obvious that some addictions are the body or brains method of coping with undesirable aspects of capitalist reality?

If we include addictions to political power, celebrity status and wealth accumulation, the list of addictions gets even longer. I suggest that addictions across such a wide range, presents itself as a social symptom not an accumulation of individual weaknesses. Furthermore, when drug addicts are asked what these addictions provide, an important connection to alienation emerges. Before addiction becomes habitual, escape from pain, stress, emotional hurt, abuse and boredom are given as reasons.

Overwhelmingly, hard-line addicts are coping with some extreme symptoms of alienation noted above. But, is addictive shopping not also a coping mechanism for some missing positive in people’s lives? Advertisements; ‘Because we are worth it’, tap into self-rewarding ourselves for feelings of worthlessness. Is habitual alcohol consumption not a means of coping with stress or a diversion from some ongoing unpleasant part of reality? Are the thousands of young people really addicted to computer games because they have individual weaknesses? Or are they perhaps entering a virtual world as an escape from harsh or empty realities of the real one?

In considering alienation, addiction and even some illnesses, is it not more accurate to conclude that it is the capitalist system, which is deranged and irrational, not those who seek regular solace from it? If we think about it, addictions and illnesses within capitalist societies could be rational or functional solutions to one form of alienating stress or another. Whatever, the side effects – addiction and illness in one of their forms – clearly works as a coping mechanism for millions of people. Perhaps, millions of ‘lone’ pensioners addicted to keeping the TV on 24/7 as a surrogate for the human ‘company’ they now sorely miss, are statistical reminders of the debilitating alienation at the core of capitalism.

Does this social level of understanding of the pressures within capitalism not explain why those who clearly know that their addiction is seriously injuring or killing them, find it impossible to stop? Is it not obvious that since, addicts cannot turn off the general or specific alienating impact of the capitalist system upon them, many will not turn off their addictive distraction – even if this means a shortened journey to death. Presumably, the less dangerous addictions also persist for essentially the same reason; that the alienating circumstances driving them also persist.

Interestingly, many early studies of pre-colonialist hunter-gatherer societies revealed a lack of economic and social alienation along with no widespread addictions. It was only when indigenous modes of production were destroyed by Colonialism and Imperialism and native populations were forced into the productive orbit of capitalism that debilitating addictions took hold. The alcoholic fate of numerous North American Indians and Australian Aborigines are the most widely known examples of such transitions from non-addiction to addiction.

Yet these, and other native populations effected, were not psychologically ill or emotionally unstable, before colonial invasions, nor after it. Like the rest of us – only more so – they were struggling with one or more of the forms of alienation spawned by the capitalist mode of production. Addictive behaviour initially offers a way to temporarily escape from capitalisms negative effects – as it still does for millions .

Roy Ratcliffe (October 2019)

For the long term health effects of stress and adversity see; ‘The Deepest Well’ by Dr. Nadine Burke Harris.

For addictions as symptoms of distress, see; ‘In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts’. By Gabor Mate`, pub. Vermilion.