Tioga Herald

Communism.  Communist Manifesto.  Karl Marx.  Friedrich Engels.

Wikipedia describes Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels as “political theorists.”  I disagree.  What came out of the “Communist Manifesto” of 1848 was more closely related to economics than to political science.

In this manifesto, was there not an attack on capitalism?  Capitalism is about economics, not politics.  Adam Smith was a  proponent of capitalism as an economic system to replace feudalism and mercantile systems which had existed up to his day.  According to the writings of P.J. O’Rourke and former Congressperson (and Republican), Joe Scarborough, Adam Smith advocated a government intervention and regulation of the excesses of banks and unbridled speculation.  That was Smith’s foray into politics, yet the ultra-conservatives today will call those who advocate what Smith advocated as being “communist.”  Marx and Engels, my friends, came some 50 or so years after Adam Smith, so check your facts, rather than striking out, like bullies, at good people, even if we, too, can make mistakes.

Marx and Engels assessed the economic systems around 1848 and concluded the systems were “capitalist.”  Even with the time period of 50 years following Adam Smith, capitalism had not fully taken root.  As a musician, I see the early 19th-century movement away from the Esterhazy (royalty) patronage of Haydn to the business independence of Beethoven.  But royalty still did run the world, whether Marx or Engels wanted to acknowledge this fact or not (or were just too dumb to see it).

Cuban and Russian exiles are also ignorant to Adam Smith and true capitalism because the czar of Russia and Battista of Cuba both presided over feudal economic systems.  Ayn Rand was mistaken in what she said because she never researched capitalism carefully enough, in order to recognize the wisdom gained by Adam Smith as he endorsed the same type of regulation which eventually became the hallmarks of Theodore and Franklin D. Roosevelt.  The Roosevelts have also been mis-perceived as “communist,” despite the fact I am able to prove they were following the wisdom of a capitalist named Adam Smith.

The Great Depression and the 2008 Bush Recession were both caused by over-speculation of bankers and investors. This was the same type of over-speculation which Adam Smith observed and thus advocated bridled capitalism in the 18th Century.

If people who are like Marco Rubio and followers of Ayn Rand, the Russian, are so stupid they refuse to see what true capitalism is – even when someone points it out, they remain stubbornly ignorant.  When such people conclude only from their narrow vision of economic systems which were actually reactions to feudalism, they remain stubbornly ignorant.  I don’t want people like Rubio or “disciples” of Ayn Rand running my nation – the nation of the Roosevelts.

The issue regarding the “Communist Manifesto” is about economics, not politics.  One can invoke a similar economic system as the one proposed by Marx and Engels, but have a democratic form of government.  These are called “socialist democracies.”  Tito of Yugoslavia had a more democratic form (politics) of “communism” or “socialism (economics).” Marx and Engels proposed an autocratic “dictatorship of the proletariat.”  HItler’s autocratic dictatorship (politics) remained a capitalist economic system, even if it did favor Caucasians and trashed Jews and other minorities.  But, to white honky racists who trash equality, no form of government or economics is good – except that which favors their pitiful selves.

There are parallels between Adam Smith’s proposal for a controlled capitalism and socialism.  In my mind, capitalism is better because it allows the economy to grow when products and services we WANT are provided in a competitive environment, such as that in Vermont (which denies the building of many big boxes, in favor of the local competitive businesses).  At the same time, we need to acknowledge human needs and, as a society AND government respond accordingly.  The problem is that the politicians, on the take from corrupt lobbyists, have given us a terrible system.  Like Vermont, Washington could deny lobbyist access to legislators, but the refusal to do so is written with dollar signs and green in the eyes.

Handouts from the government proliferate and such handouts are perpetuated by politicians trying to win elections by determining which politician can provide the most handouts.  Handouts are NOT capitalism and are NOT socialism.  Entitlements are more about a “return on our investments” than about handouts, but people are so damned confused about all of this.

It is unfortunate that so many “big piggies” believe there should be a destruction of the political system called democracy and we should replace democracy with an autocratic plutocracy run by corporations.  The forces behind these big piggies are “human” corporations ruling against the “numbers” (by bean counter standards – the stupid ones with MBAs and JDs), in other words, the “slaves” and “robots” – the common humans who are humans in the FLESH, not pieces of papers about corporations as drawn up by the bean counters.

“We the people,” rich in numbers of people but low in dollar signs, are being convinced we cannot overcome all of this.  Who are the ones with the psychological means and control of the Media, running on the informal money-based “Un-fairness Doctrine,” to convince us of this negative attitude?

I refuse to believe such negatives.  But I have a problem.  Without people shedding that negative attitude, I stand alone and can be damned, can I not?

Mister Doug