The War Against Humanity: Technology, Capital, Apocalypse

In Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 Karl Marx would ask: (1) What in the evolution of mankind is the meaning of this reduction of the greater part of mankind to abstract labor? (2) What are the mistakes committed by the piecemeal reformers, who either want to raise wages and in this way to improve the situation of the working class, or regard equality of wages (as Proudhon does) the goal of social revolution?

In political economy labor occurs only in the form of wage earning activity. But political economy knows the worker only as a working — as a beast reduced to the strictest bodily needs. Quoting Proudhon Marx will show that the goal of work is to eliminate labour time and replace it with free time:

“To develop in greater spiritual freedom, a people must break their bondage to their bodily needs-they must cease to be the slaves of the body. They must, therefore, above all, have time at their disposal for spiritual creative activity and spiritual enjoyment.”

Noticing the discrepancy between the ideal and the actuality of work, automation, and time Proudhon would remark: “Consideration has not been given . . . to this big distinction as to how far men work through machines or as machines.” Of course Proudhon in his Utopian vision thought that automation would bring about the elimination of work and the introduction of free time: “In the future life of the peoples, however, the inanimate forces of nature working in machines will be our slaves and servants.”

Continue reading

We Have Never Been Communists

We have never been Communists… a veritable contradiction has always seeped into each and every manifestation of the Communist Idea.

In Plato the abolition of the family accompanies the abolition of property: property is patriarchal, communism fraternal. So also in Marxism: Engels connected the family with private property and the state; society has been patriarchal and will become fraternal. Marxism, in succession to Locke, picked up the cause of brotherhood. The history of Marxism shows how hard it is to kill the father; to get rid of the family, private property, and the state.

The brethren, as Plato saw, should have all things in common, including wives. Locke’s commitment to brotherhood is deep enough to produce another inner contradiction: communism and private property. The world was given to the children of men in common, he says. In one sentence he affirms both principles: “Though the things of Nature are given in common, man (by being master of himself and proprietor of his own person, and the actions or labour of it) had still in himself the great foundation of property.”1

Communism from Lenin to Mao never enacted the requirements for it, rather than abolishing family, property, and state they retained all three through a centralized system of collective fatherhood of elite intellectuals (the vanguard: the elite intellectuals vs. the greater proletariat). So that the backdoor of the ancient familial relations were grafted onto the Great Leader as Patriarch, Father, God: Lenin, Stalin, Mao. Each of whom inherited the mantle of the Absolute; or, God.  (Ask yourself: Why did they take such in ardent care to preserve the mummified bodies of Lenin and Stalin, putting them on display? The God must not die or decay: his is eternal life, and in him the power of the State lives on. So instead the god sleeps in eternal quietude, allowing his cultic followers to worship him in earthly obeisance. A parody of Marx’s system…) For as we see in early Christianity the communist principles were there without a visible representative:

Sonship, or brotherhood, freed from its secret bondage to the father principle—sons after the order of Melchizedek, without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like unto the Son of God—would be free from the principle of private property. And in the first form of Christianity the brethren had all things common. Sons without fathers share everything and own nothing. (Brown, Norman O., Love’s Body: p. 7)

Without the abolition of family, private property, and the state Communism as an Idea  will remain a fantasy in the minds of elite intellectuals who have truly never known what Communism is.

  1. Locke, Two Treatises of Civil Government, 138; cf. 136.