My opinion about Marxism – 1
Marxs was all about controlling economic outcomes. Marx was trying to play the role of God. As long as the worker had the free will to leave his occupation, he could choose not to make the “capitalist” rich. It’s really that simple. Most poor countries are chock full with people that refuse to help capitalists get rich. These countries tend to enjoy a lower standard of living because the people of these countries in simplistic terms hate “creative future thinking nerds” and refuse to give capitalists a platform to raise the standard of living for everyone. Like Crabs in a bucket.
Poor Countries all over the world already practice Marxism and look at the results
In many poor nations what you’ll notice is disdain for wealth creation. Most poor nations put more value on the fiat currency than they do in the thinking behind money creation. Often lottery winners go broke because when given the same amount of money as the capitalist they realise liabilities associated with having large sums of money.
Liabilities include – someone who didn’t care for you in the past showing up at your front door asking you for some money. It’s not easy to reject people, especially people who are good at selling their sob stories to you. Most capitalist are faced with these types of people daily(Think the American television series shark tank) and if they gave 1 cent to all of these noble beggar their industrial empire would cease to exist. The capitalist learns via business, the emotion and strong will necessary to deal with the supposed poor philosophers that believe they would be suited to spend the capitalists money better than the capitalist.
Where does the value in Marxism derive?
In order for Marx’s writings to have any value a capitalistic economic structure must already exist. This should be enough to know that what he’s teaches are “economic romance novels.”
Trying to turn the worker or employee into the capitalist is the real goal of Marx. He attempts to do this without telling the employee the whole story. The truth is capitalist are often comfortable making >>>personal<<< sacrifices the average person will not make. The moment most people find any form of wealth they consume it, not only will they consume their wealth but they’ll also look down at people that don’t behave the way they do. Wealth is a state of mind, if you encounter a wealthy person what you should ask yourself is how did she/he become wealthy?
Is what that wealthy person did replicable in other forms? If so how can I mimic that person or even make what they’re doing better in PRACTICE. By attacking a working formula Marx’s philosophies are rooted in theory and a hopefulness that instead of people asking how did the wealthy person become wealthy he theories how people can use force to control the capitalist. It’s a very demonic way of thinking that reads like a romance novel where a insecure woman is trying to reform a bad boy.
In my opinion Marxism would be better suited in the fictional book pile, Marxism to me is a romance novel for economist who dream of controlling the free markets. Marxism is a best suited for people who have aspirations for being a dictator, or an economic super hero. Marxism the way I see it is a childish ideology that sounds romantic in theory but when done in practice is as complicated as his theory which ultimately leads to humans being humans and eventually rebelling.
Final thoughts on Marxism
The problem then with Marxism is that while capitalism still exists in any given society, this virus known as marxism has something in which to feed on, almost like the Aids virus if a people have been indoctrinated into Marxist ideals they would need to change their entire diet to even stand a chance of fighting it off, and as we know humans especially adults DON’T LIKE CHANGE or changing. It’s the indoctrination of marxism then that people must fear the most. If marxism is never challenged, what’s stopping people from believing Karl Marx isn’t an economic God send.
Like it or not people love easy answers and although Marx’s explanations are often complicated his solutions are often simplistic. With capitalism the foundation is simplistic and the outcomes are complicated. Capitalism is complicated because people often attach a number to being rich. Meaning if someone has made $50 million dollars that person is considered rich.
What’s not being factored in are the liabilities, the costs this rich capitalist forced to undergo. capitalist often have to change they live because of his/her financial wealth? In a real capitalistic society a bank is not always a safe place to put your money. In a real capitalistic society a rich person could lose everything in an economic crash. It’s actually Marxist protecting the capitalists from failure.
By the government granting employees, employee protections they’re giving the capitalist permission to lobby the government for more protections. It’s theis relationship with business and government that is causing perceived inequalities.
Because in order to maintain this lie Governments, politicians has to lie to people in order maintain their power. This is marxist indoctrination I wrote about earlier, this is how the virus spreads and this is how people come to depend on bigger government. People don’t need unions for workers rights.
People can simply do what people in poor countries do which is either they don’t show up to the job being offered by the capitalist or they start wars to prevent the capitalist from ever operating comfortably in their poor undeveloped country. Wars have costs and if a store is constantly being targeted for attacks the capitalist owner will close shop and probably never return. <<<< Without capitalism the aforementioned in actuality is marxism in practice
This is why Marxism is an economic romance novel, because it needs capitalism in order to exist. Capitalism doesn’t need marxism to exist, capitalism exists the way nature exists. There are different characters in the jungle for example and each species as a role to play in harmony of the region. Only God or nature in these instances can alter the outcomes and all animals involved accept this fate, some animals develop defense mechanisms while others develop offensive mechanism, the animals unprepared for the change that nature ordains get wiped out while those best prepared change with nature. As an example some reptiles survived the Mesozoic Era while others did not.
How that would relate to today’s world is some businesses got to big, so when the economy shrank or shifted those big corporations would disappear or become extinct. Now based on Marx those big businesses might be too big to fail. Why?Because via the working class they must be protected, to protect the working class.
The end result to this is to grow the government because clearly capitalism isn’t working. This is how dictators get into power in most communist countries. The people say finally A hero to save we the people from the evil capitalists, let us lay down our weapons, relax our minds and give more power to our government.
From this type of thinking you breed a whole new type of human being. changing the way that Marxist individuals think would be a lifetime task as the marxist indoctrinated individual would of course would assume that individual incentive has little or nothing to do with creating or maintaining a society. Under marxism ofcourse the people of such indoctrination would assume they are without flaws, they would hate to have their hard wired views of the world challenged. Ofcourse they would assume any flaws they have would be shared by everybody else. Because their views are so hardwired they would feel justified in physically attacking an individual with different views than they have.
In the jungle animals instinctively know that if they don’t eat they die. With Marx what he’s teaching people is that without a government people will be exploited, which is a lie. As long as people are given choices they will make a decision that are best for them. In poor countries as I’ve stated, the people collectively often destroy any concept of capitalism the moment it arrives in their region
The end result is a lower standard of living. Now if capitalism didn’t exist whose to say that those people wouldn’t be happy with what they have? Those people in poor countries are often considered poor based on capitalistic standards. However if capitalism didn’t exist, the capitalistic standard of poverty wouldn’t exist either. In closing if you comprehend my argument it’s easy to see that why Marxism is an economic romance novel!
Understanding the driving force of capitalism
In capitalism it’s in the capitalists best interest to be kind to everyone, it’s in the capitalists best interest to be charitable when he/she gets wealthy, because in real capitalism there are economic crashes and government bailouts don’t exist so if the capitalist was a mean, greedy capitalist and a crash occurred where he/she suffered losses that lead to his/her bankruptcy his/her good deeds will be the only thing that would prevent society as whole from treating that individual the way he/she treated others.
It’s the concept of volunteerism that protects the capitalist. If the capitalist is not a good person he/she must hide behind his/her money and hope it never leaves them. There’s a price attached to this type of capitalist which ultimately could lead to loneliness in the financial world high fees. And well let’s be honest here what’s the point in being wealthy if you have noone to share your wealth with? Capitalist understand that being rich isn’t always about the money.
f a capitalist doesn’t grasp this concept well… they tend to learn it as they age and have no friends, no one how loves them and vultures all round who can’t wait for this greedy capitalist to die so they can peck away at the money he/she created. There are pros and cons to every type of behavior, what people shouldn’t want is a government playing the role of economic god. This distorts everything and it’s one of the reasons people should understand why without capitalism marxism is nothing more than a playbook for maintaining the status quo. A playbook for making sure those government officials currently in power remain in power for now and into eternity. Marxism is a playbook for economic stagnation.