Now, what strength has capitalism? Does the power of the capitalists rest in themselves, or where does it come from?
It is evident that their strength lies in their capital, in their wealth. They own the industries, the shops, factories, and land. But those possessions would do them no good but for the willingness of the people to work for them and pay tribute to them. Suppose the workers should say to the capitalists: 'We are tired of making profits for you. We won't slave for you any more. You didn't create the land, you didn't build the factories, nor the mills or shops. We built them and from now on we will use them to work in, and what we produce will not be yours but will belong to the people. You will get nothing, and we won't even give you any food for your money. You'll be just like ourselves, and you will work like the rest of us.'
What would happen? Why, the capitalists would appeal to the government for aid. They would demand protection for their interests and possessions. But if the people refuse to recognize the authority of the government, the latter itself would be helpless.
You might say that is revolution. Maybe it is. But whatever you call it, it would amount to this: the government and the capitalists- the political and financial rulers - would find out that all their boasted power and strength disappear when the people refuse to acknowledge them as masters, refuse to let them lord it over them.
Can this happen, you wonder. Well, it has happened many times before, and not so very long ago again in Russia, in Germany, in Austria. In Germany that mighty war lord, the Kaiser, had to flee for his life, because the masses had decided they did not want him any more. In Austria the monarchy was driven out because the people got tired of its tyranny and corruption. In Russia the most powerful Tsar was glad to give up his throne to save his head, and failed even in that. In his own capital he could not find a single regiment toprotect him, and all his great authority went up in smoke when the populace refused to bow to it. Just so the capitalists of Russia were made helpless when the people stopped working for them and took the land, the factories, the mines and mills for themselves. All the money and 'power' of the bourgeoisie in Russia could not get them a pound of bread when the masses declined to supply it unless they did honest work.
What does it all prove?
It proves that so-called political, industrial, and financial power, all the authority of government and capitalism is really in the hands of the people. It proves that only the people, the masses, have power.
This power, the people's power, is actual: it cannot be taken away, as the power of the ruler, of the politician, or of the capitalist can be. It cannot be taken away because it does not consist in possessions but in ability. It is the ability to create, to produce; the power that feeds and clothes the world, that gives us life, health and comfort, joy and pleasure.
--Alexander Berkman
2 comments:
Of course, the capitalists would appeal to the government to protect their interests - big business bribes the government through lobbyists and campaign contributions. In turn, the government grants them 'corporate welfare' designed to weaken your power and the power of those that oppose them.
There is a good Special Report on Special Interests as well as the effect of having one dominant political party in Washington. Democrats are locked out of committees and debates. Go to Boston.com/Special Reports and see what I am talking about here.
The US is different from other countries - there are 3 dominant economic classes, rich, middle and poor. The middle class doesn't recognize that it is in its best interests to work with the poor in an alliance against wealthy power brokers. Instead, rather than criticize the rich, because the middle class doesn't criticize a group that it longs to be a part. They don't criticize corporate welfare, but tell them to criticize a 'welfare recipient' and they are all for that because they look down on the poor like the rich look down on them.
I often hear the expression "Pull yourself up from your bootstraps" as if we can get somewhere in life completely on our own. But most people get jobs through third parties, such as recruiters, friends, relatives or other forms of networking.
But amazingly, once a man becomes 'rich' he claims to be a "Self Made Man". Is anyone Self Made?
Very good vmprshad...it is actually in the best interests for the middle class to help the low class. They think that they have done all this hard work to get to where they are, and despise the poor for leeching off of them. The system is what divides these classes. The best interests of the middle class are the following: To realize that their own wealth depends on the poor class. To realize that the wealthy class exploits them as "model citizens" despite the inequality of opportunity in this world. To realize that much of their stress is caused by tax concerns, financial concerns, and the never ending rat race. They were endowed with either stronger intelligence, or stronger will to bring themselves out of poverty. But take away these added concerns, and treat each other, and the lower classes equally would not only relieve the stress of paperwork and the almighty dollar, but it would also breed a better sense of brotherhood, which in turn causes man to help his fellow man. Most won't help a person in need, unless somebody else spends their time to help that person. We have been turned against each other, but have been taught to divide and conquer. United we stand, divided we fall. Once a man sees another man helping his fellow, there is more of a chance that somebody else will stop and help as well. But so many people can't be bothered with helping them because they have a schedule to keep, money to make, deadlines to beat. So once you free up those stresses, man will help each other much more often. Making life much easier for all.
Post a Comment