In recent years, anti-capitalism has become quite prevalent in the west. Just last week, anti-capitalist rallies were held all around the world, and they aren’t the first, not this century and certainly not this decade!
Recently, we covered the theory of the corporatocracy. Many of the people who believe that we are indeed in a corporatocracy also believe that in order to stop it, the government needs to adopt an anti-capitalist stance.
Naturally, this has caused many to wonder what exactly is anti-capitalism? And, more importantly is it right or wrong?
What is Anti-Capitalism?
Anti-capitalism has existed in some form or another for well over 150 years. It is highly likely that it existed in some crude form before this, however, this was never written down, so we have little to no proof of it.
Essentially, anti-capitalism is a political movement, often within socialist and/or communist organizations that opposes capitalism in almost every regard.
There are several forms of anti-capitalism that exist, usually just the same beliefs that are of varying radicalness.
For some, it is the desire to remove corporate interests from politics as a whole, and get governments to force corporations to increase wages. For others, it is the latter, with all legal loopholes rewritten beforehand.
In very rare (and quite radical instances), anti-capitalism it is the complete overthrow of corporations and their governments. The groups that support the latter views often make the news for their extreme stances on things.
However, for the purposes of this article, I will be focusing on the belief that anti-capitalism is simply the removal of corporate interest from politics and removing the loopholes that they seem to use so often.
Anti-Corporate Activism
In recent years, a phenomenon known as anti-corporate activism has arisen. Whilst it is separate from anti-capitalism, with not all anti-capitalists agreeing with it.
Essentially, a small group of mostly young, somewhat militant anti-capitalists, have taken their beliefs arguably too far. In recent years, several high profile anti-corporate rallies and marches have been held all around the world.
Most anti-corporate activists are anti-capitalists who believe that any form of big business corporations are bad for the public as a whole. Often, they believe that these corporations impede democracy as a whole.
The term anti-corporate activism is a very generic term. In most circumstances, anti-corporate activism are marches, similar to those of the Occupy Wall Street movement, calling for smaller corporate interests and the like.
However, occasionally, there are more high profile anti-corporation activities. For the most part, these “activists” graffiti the offices of megacorporations, or play dumb pranks on them.
In more serious matters, ones that often make international media, high up business executives for these companies get attacked or receive death threats. In extremely rare situations, people will actually try the latter, even after police involvement.
History
There is a long, drawn-out history of people not supporting capitalism for a variety of different reasons.
Origins
Whilst it is highly probable that there were anti-capitalist sentiments throughout history, the mid-nineteenth century proved to be the beginning of anti-capitalist sentiments.
The Industrial Revolution led to many leaving the countryside and to the cities in search of a better life. This saw many of them live in ramshackle accommodation, working in unsafe conditions, and work on very little food.
For those who owned the factories, they had sprawling estates, ate the very best food and socialized with royalty. Many of these men were far richer than most people will ever be in their lifetime!
And this was happening over most of Western Europe and North America. For many, other than the prospect of going to a colony, there was no other option than to work in the factories.
This inspired a young Karl Marx to form some of the first recorded anti-capitalist sentiments in the world. Eventually, he would write The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital.
These books would soon reach the hands of many young people all over Europe. Eventually, this would form the basis of the Communist League, an international communist movement.
Early 1900’s
By the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, many literate workers managed to get their hands on either/both The Communist Manifesto and/or Das Kapital. Reading the book(s), they found themselves agreeing with much of it.
You see, by the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, the Gilded Age was in full swing. Where before, there were several relatively small corporations doing the same thing in one area, now there was only one or two.
This saw many of the owners become extremely wealthy, to the point where they are still some of the richest people to have ever lived! At the same time, the workers were still extremely poor, living in even worse conditions for less pay.
Many of those workers who could read began disseminating the philosophies of Das Kapital and/or The Communist Manifesto to their colleagues. Eventually, many of these workers formed their own communist parties.
This saw many of them demand higher wages, striking if their “evil” (that was how they referred to them) bosses didn’t give it to them. Many more openly disseminated anti-capitalist rhetoric as they were working.
Eventually, this tension got so much that many of these megacorporations were disbanded, being broken up into hundreds of smaller independent companies. Many of these companies still exist today.
Mid-Twentieth Century
The government, not wanting a full on revolution, gave in to their demands. This saw many of the remaining megacorporations disbanded and many more social reforms implemented.
With this, the affection for communism and/or socialism went away for the most part. WWII made sure to end any further support for communism, as following the war, the West’s enemy became the communist USSR.
This saw many people who’s parents and grandparents had been staunch socialists or communists, become some of the staunchest supporters of capitalism. Many of them still hold these views today!
At the same time, the rich, whilst still immensely wealthy, were not as rich as they’d once been. Taxes on their enterprises, numerous houses and cars severely decreased the anti-capitalist sentiment around the world.
Some countries even went as far to implement some of the first wealth taxes of the modern day, often failing dismally. However, for the first time in recorded history, anti-capitalist beliefs were at an all time low.
Of those people who still held anti-capitalist views, most were young college students who eventually lost those ideologies. For those who kept them, they were ostracized by the rest of society, and lived mostly off the grid.
Modern Day
Today, the same isn’t true. Whilst it often depends on what outlet you read, the general consensus is that most young people (under-35’s) hold anti-capitalist views of some degree.
This has been shown time and time again in most Western nations. During the 2019 General Election, the openly socialist Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn had thousands of young people believing his socialist rhetoric.
Even during the as yet ongoing 2020 Presidential Election, Joe Biden has ran on a similar platform his close friend, Barack Obama did: jobs, healthcare and education. Whilst also expressing anti-capitalist views.
Whilst there are several reasons the young are turning more and more to socialism, it is partly due to one more thing: the rich. Many young people have seen the rich benefit from capitalism, in their eyes, too much.
Many people believe that were are in fact in a second Gilded Age. Once again, a handful of megacorporations have concentrated on global commerce, making their owners extremely wealthy.
At the same time, most young people are struggling to get high paying jobs that they believe they have earned. Even if they do get a high paying job, their hours are long and they are struggling to buy their first house.
Why do They Support it?
As mentioned before, no two anti-capitalists support the movement for the exact same reason(s).
For some, it is because the rich have gotten too rich. Whilst they have had so-called “brutal capitalism”, the rich have enjoyed government-sanctioned socialism during times of economic distress.
Whilst they have been laid off, been foreclosed on and/or almost been made homeless, the rich have only ever gotten richer, with their companies getting larger, and worst of all, taking jobs to cheaper markets like China.
For others, it’s down to poor working conditions and long hours. Like their great-grandparents before them, they have seen regulations for work safety decrease, increasing the risk of injury and even death.
At the same time, longer hours have be implemented by most corporations. However, these corporations haven’t increased pay alongside it, but have instead gotten rid of experienced employees, for younger unexperienced ones.
For others, it’s because they have essentially become wage slaves. On top of the extra hours and minimal pay, most employees today are wage slaves, in a constant cycle of payment and expenditure.
Just to cover basic living expenses, most employees use up most, if not all, of their wages! This sees them unable to enjoy the finer things in life, at the same time that the big boss is a multibillionaire.
What Would They Replace it With?
Due to their very nature, many supporters of anti-capitalism want to rid the world, or at least their country of capitalism. In its place, they would institute a new form of trading, of their own choosing, should this ever come to pass.
Barter System
Many anti-capitalists believe that instead of capitalism and their money, we should go old school. And by old school, we mean really old school.
In place of money and capitalism, many anti-capitalists believe that we should go back to the barter system. A system that incidentally created the need for money, and therefore, capitalism as an extension.
Essentially, the barter system would see humans once again trade goods and services with someone else for what we want/need. I like to think of it like this:
Let’s say that you were an apple grower. Your friend Steve was a banana grower. Let’s now say that you wanted a banana from your friend Steve. Chances are, he isn’t going to give it away for free.
Instead, he may trade you three apples for two bananas. If he didn’t want your apples, then you both may need to find a third good that you both wanted that you could then trade with.
Naturally, this can get very complicated very quickly. However, to some supporters of anti-capitalism, complicated and confusing is better than a capitalist system.
Socialism / Communism
Many note that the barter system, whilst good in their, often fails in practice. As an alternative, many anti-capitalists advocate for the introduction of socialism or communism.
Before I continue, I feel the need to stress that not all socialists are anti-capitalists, and not all anti-capitalists are socialists/communists. However, one many lead to you becoming the other.
Many anti-capitalists believe that some form of state ownership of the means of production is better than the current system. Here, all goods would be given out to those who need them first, with no waste being produced.
At the same time, all corporations would be owned by the government. This would allow for all workers to have high wages (at least compared to during the so-called “capitalist dictatorship” as many of them call it).
Due to communism and socialism, everyone would be equal. This would also mean that the so-called “greedy capitalists” wouldn’t be able to influence laws and elections will their billions as well.
At the same time, all of those people able to work would be given a job, with only those who physically couldn’t work not being given a job. This would make things like layoffs a thing of the past.
Is it Right?
Here is where I undoubtedly annoy roughly half of the people reading this, regardless of my answer. I can already feel the keyboard warriors anxiously reading ahead in the case that I don’t support their views…
However, anti-capitalism isn’t right, at least not in its current form. As someone who is (fairly) young (mid-thirties) I do see why so many people support the notions of communism and/or socialism.
Personally, I am very pro-capitalist, believing that whilst many of the other economic theories have merit, they don’t work as well as capitalism does. It is by no means perfect, a few will go without, but a few is better than many.
Before you get angry, hear me out. Both socialism and communism have their merits, however, in the long run, fails to produce a productive economy with satisfied workers, and good living conditions.
Instead of holding incredibly left-wing anti-capitalist views, try holding moderate anti-capitalist views. Instead of looking for a complete overthrow of the present government and capitalism, try social reform.
This way, both sides win. The rich, get to keep a portion of their wealth, whilst their employees get to have a better chance at making it in life, whilst also ensuring they’ll be able to eat, as their grandchildren will later on.
In all honesty, who actually likes starving? Not because they want to, but because the economy is so stagnant that without starvation, the economy will collapse in its entirety!
What do you think about anti-capitalism? Should it be more or less widespread? Tell me in the comments!
Photo courtesy of Paul Hartyanszky via Flickr.
Capitalism does not exist. There is no such thing as capitalism.
The idea of something called, “capitalism” was merely Karl Marx’s Hegelian anti-thesis to the notion of a utopia, and little more.
The reason Marx chose the obscure idea of “capitalism” (a term that had previously been used only twice, in print), was because it was a new enough idea that he could re-define it and mold it into an appropriately evil anti-thesis for the utopian notion of communism. By making the idea seem the ultimate evil counter-point to utopia, Marx guessed (and correctly so) that the entire world would be morally compelled to embrace his new ideas, now known as “Marxism”.
From this point-of-view, capitalism is–itself–Marxism.
Karl Marx made capitalism an evil enterprise by declaring that the profits from capitalism were theft. If profits are indeed theft, then Marx was correct and humanity has a moral obligation to embrace Marxism. Indeed, much of the world seems to agree. This is what Marxists believe and it is what they still teach today (that): profit is theft, capitalism is mankind’s greatest evil and Marxism is the way out.
But Marx was wrong. And what’s more is that, Marx was undoubtedly aware that he was wrong, as early as 1871 just as his first edition had sold-out and right before second printing of “Das Kapital” was to begin in 1872. I cannot prove that Marx knew he was wrong, but his error is so large that it would be absurd to suppose he was not aware of it. And moreover, his actions belie the truth; he stopped writing.
The entire world has been living in a “Marxist illusion” for roughly 150 years and the “way out”, is understanding why Marxism rises or falls on the definition of value.
This is actually really interesting. I had never thought of it like that. Indeed, the term capitalism didn’t arise until after Marx’s works.
Sadly, it is true that most people who read Marx’s work despise capitalism due to Marx claiming that profit was theft.
I believe that capitalism is undeniably the greatest driving force of technological innovation..If not for the inventions that are uniquely tied to the capitalistic mind-set of the last 150 years, then the good old U.S.A is in the same dire conditions that plague many of the world’s economically stressed countries. Does corporate greed need to be addressed ? Of course. Can America ” flip the switch” and embrace third world socialistic proclivities without economic death ? Nope. The drive to push America to socialism is just the stepping stone to a one world government. I have never been able to reason this Orwellian totalitarian thought process , taken into account of course my own ethnocentric quarantine within these borders of the U.S.A .
Agreed Kevin.
Things need to be done about the current situation, but anti-capitalism/socialism/communism is not the answer. After all, just look at how it “helped” Eastern Europe, they’re poorer than they were before the revolution!
Marxism is based on the ‘labor theory of value’ which states that value is equal to materials, plus the labor to create a product, plus the profit – which Marx declared theft. But this theory was proved, not just incorrect but backwards, in 1871, with the publication of papers by economists, Carl Menger, Leon Walras, Stanley Jevons and John Bates Clark (for whom the JBC award is given), that all redefined the theory of value.
The moral justification for Marxism evaporated as the 2nd and (larger printing) of Das Kapital was about to go to press. Marx had to have known. He was the most celebrated economist of the era. He identified what he believed was a moral turpitude that no rational or moral person could allow to stand without a fight. He incited a movement that was willing to go to war to correct what seemed to be the most evil thing a rich person could do – steal from the poor. But the redefinition of value by Menger, Jevons, Walras and Clark, proved so absolutely that Marx was wrong, that he could do nothing but remain silent – which he did for the next 12 years, until he died. Volume II of Das Kapital was written from Marx’s random notes by Fredrich Engles, after Marx died.
In the labor theory of value, the price is determined by the producer and he adjusts the price to steal a greater portion of the profits for himself from the workers, either though direct high-prices not shared with workers or by means of wage structures including piece-work, hourly wages, etc., where “small thefts” can be realized, thus denying those profits to the workers. But there is no profit and there is nothing to steal, in the form of wages, when 25% of startups fail in the first year and less than half survive 5 years and less than 1/3rd survive after 10 years. Most enterprises are short-term ventures, which may or may not be profitable. And many of those that survive beyond 10 years, merely eek along until they are bought by someone else, (absorbed) or are shuttered and closed at a loss.
So how is value determined and why was Marx wrong?
Several decades earlier, David Ricardo questioned the labor theory of value too by asking, “Why does a bottle of wine I put in the cellar become worth more after sitting for 5 years, when I add no more labor and no more materials to the product?”. Ricardo knew something was missing. But what?
Meger, Jevon, Walras and Clark ushered in what is knows a ‘the marginalist revolution’ in economics, which redefined value as being, the amount a person is willing to pay for an item, after he has obtained all he desires at a given price. In other words, if I need a dozen apples and I can by them at 50-cents each, it will cost me $12 dollars. I don’t need more apples. But, if you’re selling apples and offer me another 5 apples for $2, I’ll get 1 for free. I may still say, “no”; but, if you drop the price far enough, I will likely be induced to buy additional apples if, “the price is right”. The reason we have 2-for-1 sales in supermarkets today is a direct result of the redefinition of value that occurred the same year that Marx built his ideology based on the theory that ‘marginalism’ replaced.
The world has been living in an illusion, born of a false dilemma, for about 150 years. We are not ‘capitalists’. We are ‘consumers’ and we set the price, not the producer.
The labor theory of value is not just wrong or missing some element. It is in fact, backwards. What we have is “consumerism” not “capitalism”. And Marx could not write that – even if he knew it was correct!
Potato potatoe, word play interests me in the least. The power and meaning of statements that are backed by the moralistic ineptitude of social media giants and their agendas are as treasonous as the ” declaration of independence ” was to the british some 200 years ago. I have found that trying to explain the moral and ethical principles of our country and the reason for its greatness to certain factions or people is akin to showing a drowning man a picture of an oxygen molecule…