Revolutionary Thought?

I've decided to start doing sort of a book review blog with this now. I read a lot and most of the books i choose to read i do so with the intention that they will have an impact on me, that they will give me not only knowledge but wisdom. There is a lot of garbage out there for people to read, i know, I'm subjected to a lot of it through university, there's just a lot of meaningless delusional reading a person can do that will do more harm than good. I know that i haven't tested the waters of every reading avenue out there, not even close, but i know what really moves me, what forces my mind to expand and to follow a train of thought to it's conclusion, I'll be writing about books like that. Also, when i choose a book to read i usually get to know a little more about the author before deciding whether or not to read it, i find if i know a bit about their life, their general philosophy and also who they impacted and who they were impacted by it helps to give me a greater perspective.

The point of this is to hopefully pique the readers interest in books that have had a really profound impact on myself, and in books that i feel everybody would be better off for having read. I'll probably be writing about more philosophical books, both existentially, socially, and politically. So there will be no plot outlines or anything, that would ruin it, I'm just going to write about what i learned and why i learned it.

The first book i want to write about is Leo Tolstoy's The Kingdom of God Is Within You. The paradigm presented in this book is extremely profound and it's one that i have yet to fully understand. I know that the stance that Tolstoy takes in this book is very practical and when it has been applied in the world the outcomes have been powerful. To sum it up The Kingdom of God Is Within You is as much a political manifesto as it is a call for an inward revolution. When a person chooses a beliefs system that opposes institutional powers it is as a consequence that political and social action happen. That is, if that person or collective persons belief is foundationally strong. I think of all the convictions that Tolstoy had, and I'll approach them later, the most integral part of his message, the one conviction that everything else hinged on was love. An undying source of love that a person can embrace, not because they are special or unique but because they have embraced an ultimate humility that allows them to see that it is only through committing their life to what Tolstoy called the "Divine Theory of Life" that they can live a life of love and a life that transforms the lives of those around them.

I should probably explain what meant by a "Divine Theory of Life" if i do that I'll be getting into more detail than i want to and end up writing way too much. But to briefly explain it, because i thought it was important, Tolstoy saw three views of life, one being the individual, or the animal view of life, when a person seeks only to fulfill their own personal satisfaction, through fulfilling their own will. the second being the societal or pagan view of life where a person embraces patriotism and commits to the will of the state, under the illusion that it is also their own will. And the third being the divine view in which a person commits their will or their purpose in life to the God, the principle source of life. There is a lot more that can be said and Tolstoy elaborates a lot further so any conclusions about that brief explanation should probably be put off until reading this book.

What i find most inspiring about writers like Tolstoy is that they weren't afraid to approach knowledge and wisdom at a different level. Writers like Tolstoy, Henry David Thoreau, and Soren Kierkegaard among others were writing immensely important philosophy, but they weren't using science to legitimize everything they were saying, they were using faith which is far more powerful. There is a distinct divide for example, between the writings of Frederich Nietzsche and Karl Marx as compared to the writings of Kierkegaard or Tolstoy, the writings of Nietzsche and Marx are far more militant, if i can use that word, they were grounded in science and despite both of them having rejected faith as a way of life, faith was intrinsically bound up within all they wrote, to believe in science takes equal if not more faith than is required to believe in a divinity beyond this world. So to finish this point, Tolstoy did not deny faith it's rightful place as most secular thinkers of that time did and in doing so his writings have served an integral part in creating realizable change in our world.

I'm getting pretty disorganized in what I'm writing now, I wrote the first part of this a month ago so my train of thought isn't exactly fluent. If you've been able to get to this point, I'll sum up the most important idea within this book. The foundation of this book is based on "The Sermon of The Mount" which is found in the Gospels of the Bible's New Testament. This part of the Bible is extremely powerful and has the ability, if believed, to change not only people's lives but the world around them. Essentially it teaches love, unconditional love of all of our human brothers and sisters. As a result it also teaches that we should not strike back at those who harm us, that we should not resist evil, and this is where Tolstoy's The Kingdom of God is Within You takes off. If you're familiar with Mahatma Gandhi at all, he corresponded with Tolstoy specifically regarding this book and these ideas were integral, they were actually the foundation of what Gandhi accomplished, just to put into perspective the power of this idea when it's applied to the world.

I won't elaborate further on this concept, it would be doing Tolstoy's explanation a disservice. Another key concept in the book is the idea of Anarchy and how it may be the only true form of equality amongst humanity. The basic idea is that government is inherently flawed, because by nature the minority are controlling the majority, even if they were elected by the majority that does not quell the fact that there is a disconnect between the decisions being made by government and the will of the people. Furthermore Tolstoy would argue that institutions such as military and police forces are set up to protect the state, not the people as is thought to be the case. As such Tolstoy contends that Anarchy is the only feasible solution and that since we have not attempted an anarchistic living environment we do not actually know that it would result in chaos as is generally assumed. The sticking point to this argument though is that although there may be no worldly authority if anarchy were to be implemented there is still a divine authority and one that we must adhere to if anarchy is to be successful. This is where you can get into the idea of Christian Anarchism, which is a key aspect of the writings of not only Tolstoy but the the two other faith based thinkers i mentioned earlier.

Tolstoy also attacks Christendom much the same way Kierkegaard did, he seems distraught by the hypocrisy abound in the lives of "Christians" and by the actions of so called Christian nations, which is a contradictory term in itself. The point he makes is that we do not understand Christianity, we do not grasp Christ and what he did while he lived on this earth, we only take little bits and pieces and use them to our own advantage. But Tolstoy takes the way that Jesus lived literally and is inspired to follow it, as such he wrote this book. To really understand this aspect of Tolstoy it helps to read his book A Confession, i probably should have written about that first but maybe at some later point i will. Anyway if anyone was able to maneuver through that mess of writing, i strongly recommend this book, if it's taken for what it says i think the ideas presented in it have the power to change things, drastically.

Levelling the Living

The other day i was thinking what the world would look like if we all realized that all of humanity is and was created as equal. That we all have the same entitlement to basic human needs like food, shelter, health care, etc. and despite the fact that even basic resources like this are so unevenly distributed there is an aura about every living person that forces you to know that you are no different than they are. You may speak a different language or practice a different culture but at the core of every person, our desires, our needs, are the same. We all have different talents and different gifts and we all have different personalities but that uniqueness is all meant to manifest itself in a way that works towards the same purposes.

I can't remember how i got thinking about this, it was probably through a conversation i was having, but one thing that forced my attention was the thought at what our lives would look like if we realized the inherent egalitarianism of our lives, specifically those of us living in areas of the world where we enjoy more material prosperity. Although we are in North America and Western Europe, really all of the "developed" or "developing" world, incredibly spiritually bankrupt we have no right to deprive those less fortunate, both in our own countries and in the rest of the world, of basic living necessities. This is particularly thought provoking when we look at the fact that we are depriving others when we have more than we need and many of us do. I'm guilty.

The only possible way a reasonably intelligent person can justify to themselves having more than they need when there is so much needing and deprivation staring them in the face is by telling themselves that they are more valuable than the individuals who are suffering. These people, say, those who are hoarding out of no necessity, that poor or materially deprived people, "are too lazy, they are stupid, they are racially inferior, they need only work harder and they will no longer be deprived, and that they have failed to survive in the survival of the fittest mentality (however stupid and primitive this mindset is) that our culture promotes and as such need to be weeded out so that the stronger can prevail"

This might sound extreme but I've heard this more than once coming from people who enjoy many of life's material fantasies. This way of thinking, although it is only spoken by a minority is thought, at least sub-consciously by the majority. There is no other way of explaining our ineptitude at sacrificing bits of our well-being for the help of those (who are our equals) who have not been as materially blessed. A good question to ask is would you let your brother or sister or good friend go hungry when you have food to spare? Any reasonable person will answer that of course they would feed a loved one who has fallen on hard times. If we are all equal, and we are, we need to apply this logic not to just our blood-relatives but to all of our brothers and sisters.

I'm sure if this type of thinking were to be introduced and to be thought of as feasible in mainstream life many people would question: How do we know we are all equal? Where is there the law that calls all humanity to be treated equally? Our society, our popular philosophy does not have an answer for this because we have been trained to think in terms of relative truth (which is an oxymoron, if truth is relative the word truth should not exist) we have no morally binding laws that we are willing to acknowledge. And as such have molded a world that is bursting with infection and disease, where the oppressed are murdered by the oppressors and the oppressed dream of murdering their oppressors. Where we have no right to claim what is right or wrong because we refuse to acknowledge a law that distinguishes the two. And no, individuals cannot decide for themselves what is right or wrong, we tried that, Stalin, Hitler... remember?

The truth is one of the most basic principles of a rational and practical human life, "love your neighbor as yourself", points towards universal equality. It cannot be realized without an all-encompassing equality that sees material necessities for what they are (the means that empirically sustain human life) and is willing to sacrifice little, some, or most of all of ones material comfort in order to see ones neighbor nourished, sheltered, and healthy. The answer that responds to how a person goes about with the convictions to make these sacrifices comes from the same place that life's most basic philosophical principles do, the bible, primarily the teachings of Jesus. At this point this discussion could get into a much greater depth but i'll leave that for later. Now the challenge is living out what you are trying to believe, it has to become reality, it is reality and when it reaches that point in the consciences of people interested in discovering life's true meaning this world can't help but change.

Why We Fight

"...acceptance of the (perceived) need to oppose evil with violence is nothing other than the justification people give to their habitual and favorite vices: vengeance, avarice, envy, ambition, pride, cowardice, and spite." - Leo Tolstoy

I've been reading a lot of Tolstoy lately, one of the things i admire about his writing, among many, is his refusal to seek rationalization for acts of violence. Without getting into all of the philosophizing he does around the issue the basic premise, at least from my perspective, is that acting violently in order to halt evil or to counter violence that threatens or opposes your wishes is actually only perpetuating the existing evil and only creating more violence not only at the present but in the future as well. This seems like a basic principle if you contemplate it for more than a second or two. To make it even clearer, say you get punched in the face, their might be no reason behind this act of violence, maybe you had done something in the past to provoke it, maybe not. In response to this act of violence you punch back, chances are the aggressor is going to hit you again and this will continue until one of you decides your going to kill each other if it keeps up and one of you walks away.

If you take this principle and apply it to the broader world it seems to work out. Any act of war is a perpetuation of violence. If you want to triumph over violence, you don't use violence. Fighting evil with evil is such a complete contradiction that it seems even the power crazed minds who are ordering wars to be fought in the name of justice and liberty and so on would be able to grasp the violence + violence = .... surprise.. more violence concept quite easily. History demonstrates this concept better than anyone could ever explain it. The question is, How do you combat evil if you are confined to non-violent means?

History can answer that question as well. You counter violence with peace, you counter evil with good, it makes reasonable sense but when this principle is applied to the real world and to the minds of humanity it looses its luster. I think the quote above explains why, we would rather fulfill our most primitive satisfactions, spite, greed, etc. than seek a true solution to a problem. It still doesn't quite work out though, when you consider that after 9/11 in the United States the majority of people thought good of seeking vengeance on the perpetrators of the attacks, even if their identities or motives weren't fully knows and even if the majority of people had been brainwashed and manipulated by media propaganda into thinking violent action was needed if their own lust for vengeance wasn't enough.

With regards to 9/11, people will ask: are we just supposed to sit back and do nothing? Of course we take action, USA USA USA USA USA!!!! If somebody is willing to commit an extreme act of violence against you, chances are you aren't completely innocent to begin with, this was certainly the case with the U.S prior to 9/11 and even more so after it. If the tyranny that the Western world has evoked on the rest of the world were to be applied to the West, we would all either be dead, starving, living in destitute poverty, or pretending we really love that great big beastly behemoth that slaughtered all our ancestors, some of our friends and some of our neighbors.

So the correct course of action in any volatile situation would be the more difficult, albeit more rational one. To reflect on yourself, on your own action. Does your enemy have reason to hate you? Perhaps they don't, perhaps you're the victim of a completely unprovoked act of violence, then what do you do? This is most difficult to accept as it seems to go against human nature, and it does, but it doesn't go against true human nature, it only goes against the human nature we have been taught resides within us when in fact there is something much more liberating that is within our reach. This true human condition spurs us to love our enemy, not to strike back with vengeance but to offer a glimpse of reason and a glimpse of true humility so that we do not provoke further violence.

Unfortunately, very few people reach a human condition that has rid itself of the selfish desires our world teaches is so valuable. But those who do, if they are not persecuted and tormented to no end, if they live to act out their will. Those people have a gripping effect on the entire human race, they teach lessons, they live by example, they suffer but ultimately succeed. If it were not for a doctrine of love and peace and humility, values our colossal stupidity is often moved to shun, and for those few people who actually live and have lived by those convictions this world would be an unlivable place.

Unreasonable Reason

If you've read all of my posts on this blog (If anyone has, I'm really sorry you've subjected yourself to my ranting) you'll know that i have a minor issue with the enlightenment and how it's taken to be such a great thing in universities and in society as a whole. We've abandoned the earlier, primitive way of thinking and let our innate ability to reason and be rational take over. One problem. Turn your ears to the ideals and actions of dominant society and you'll hear the deathly shrieking of millions of lost and wasted lives and of millions more beating each other over the head with reckless abandoned. Reason and Rationality have failed miserably and if you don't grasp that concept or disagree with me.... well you'll have to keep reading.

I've been reading a book that touches on the developments of rationality and existentialism called "The Real Face of Atheism", i thought with all these semi coherent, self proclaimed philosophers running around with their eyes gouged out shouting about how they just read Christopher Hitchens delusional ramblings, i would try and read something a little more balanced to try and see where all this atheist rhetoric is coming from. And if you historicize the development of Western thought it's no surprise that books like "The God Delusion" gain best-selling recognition. On a side note if you read Hitchens in particular do some research before doing so, his politics are so incredibly twisted it would make any of his arguments hard to believe.

Rationality as a religion can be traced back as far back as Galileo, but i don't think the age of reason really took hold until Emanuel Kant, and then more firmly with Nietzsche. Kant basically wanted society to reason based on the pure rationality of the mind, free of God and free of happiness or emotion. One of the many problems with this is that the human mind, as has been demonstrated too many times to count, has not been able to sufficiently reason void of any emotions and void of any moral law. This is getting too philosophical and could go off into a discussion about moral law and how it's arrived at, should it/does it exist, etc. but i don't feel like writing about that right now.

One last thing that i think can safely put doubt into anyones mind as to the legitimacy and the prowess of the enlightenment, as it claims to have shaken off the chains of theologies sheer irrational stupidity. Most people know Nietzsche proclaimed the death of God but what most people don't know is the warnings he gave about such a problamation. If you read his parable of the Madman, the madman was who Nietzsche used to show the state of humanity once it had disposed of God, he was not in a healthy state of mind as his name would suggest. Further to all of this Nietzsche also predicted that the 20th century would be the bloodiest in history. He was right and it's a bit ironic that his writings were inspiration to lunacy driven madmen like Hitler and Stalin, who are responsible for 50 millions deaths between them. These men wanted to create societies with no moral law where the perfection and magnificence of their own minds would shape and nurture ideal conditions for the maximization of life. Hitler's mind is among the most twisted to have ever existed.

The point of all this is that while the enlightenment and its great philosophers claimed progression and assaulted the "primitive" ways of the past, the way of thinking they have created has shaped a world where death and destruction hang a dark cloud over the whole of humanity. The question more people need to start asking in universities and on the streets is: Why do we think they way we do and why are we taught what we are taught? And. Why isn't it working, why is the rotting core of humanities heart being further and further exposed? The more we see it, the more we wilt in the inescapable depression we brought on ourselves.

I could go on and on about this but i don't really have time to sit down for a few hours and actually construct a more viable argument, hopefully i made some valid point and avoided contradicting myself.

How We Live

This is an essay i did for my social movements and social change class. It has to do with what i was discussing a couple posts down, only it makes more sense. I would have liked to touch more on the human side of things with this essay but i really didn't have the space to do it, nevertheless i think it's important to note that all the forces I'm talking about cause a level of human suffering that would make us sick to our stomachs if we ever saw it first hand.

Here's the essay.

As modern globalization has emerged to catapult capitalism into its post Cold War era, the world has witnessed capitalisms borders expand to engulf nearly every aspect of life in nearly every country. However, the benefits that capitalism can bring, the wealth that can be generated by greater productivity, have not been seen by the majority of the world’s citizens. Capitalism has in fact created more poverty. (Singh, Lecture: February 19, 2008) The worker remains increasingly expropriated from the means of production and in cases where the workers have begun to gain ground they are quickly crushed by the heavy hand of Western intervention which is fearful its tight grip on the means of production may be loosened.

In this essay I look to show how developing and third world nations have been exploited and manipulated in order to further increase capitalist causes. Because of these manipulations many of their citizens live in extreme poverty. Using Marx’s framework put forth in the Communist Manifesto and using a cotemporary political economy ideology I will show how these acts of imperial benevolence and terror are fundamental to the very existence of the kind of expansive capitalist juggernaut which exists today. I will begin my argument with a discussion of production relations and how they cause class conflict and allow for violent enterprises to spring up in defense of these relations. Second, I will trace how the dominant infrastructure of a society, or the means of production, shapes a societies superstructure, or the state. I will then seek to show how the state acts as an agent in extending terrors which are fundamental to its continued control throughout the globe. Thirdly, I will focus on how the capitalist class ideologies that come to shape the infrastructure of society and in-turn the state affect the laboring classes in countries where the imperial arm of capitalism has swept through. Lastly, I will conclude with a discussion of the necessary violence inherent to capitalism and attempt to examine what can be done to halt this process before it claims anymore victims.

The relations of production under a capitalist system require that labor is liberated from the means of production. (Singh, Lecture: January 15, 2008) In other words, the laborer is disconnected from the resources and mechanisms which create goods and services. This divide is not an inherent feature in any society, it came about through a process of class struggle (Singh, Lecture: January 15, 2008) in which the workers are in many cases forcibly removed from their attachment to the means of production or their striving towards more equal production relations.

The relations of production that are necessary for capitalism to function were created through struggle, this struggle does not stop at the inception of these capitalist production relations, it continues well after they have been established and will continue until they have been abolished. (Singh, Lecture: February 19, 2008) There is a clear division of interest between the laboring and capitalist classes. The capitalist class looks to create a common interest which adheres to the maintenance of current production relations; this is achieved through the political control of the state. (Marx and Engels, 1986) On the other hand, the laboring class is striving to move closer towards having a hand in the means of production, they are attempting to alter the mode of production. In this way it is clear to see how the relations of production translate into volatile relations amongst human beings. Large margins of society do not have their interests served through a capitalist system. It is the job of the capitalist class to somehow convince the laboring class majority that their interests will be served. If this cannot be done through a series of false promises and lies, then, because the capitalist class controls the state it can be done through force or violence.

This violence can be seen most noticeably if one looks at the imperial ambitions of the world’s most dominant capitalist power, which is today the United States. Because of globalization the capitalist interests of the West have become necessarily expanded throughout the world. When those interests are threatened by a countries attempt to revolutionize capitalist production relations or to emerge as a socialist state, the capitalist interests must be protected. This is exemplified when in the mid to late 1900’s the core countries of South America were beginning to emerge as socialist states and served as an example to the hope of the developing world. (Klein, 2007) All of these countries, Argentina, Peru, and Chile to name a few had their flourishing development violently halted because of the threat they posed to Western capitalisms global dominance. (Klein, 2007)

These poor countries had served to provide cheap resources to Western Capitalists and helped these capitalists to maintain the existing set of production relations within their own countries by allowing them to keep their workforces appeased with reasonable wages afforded to them because of the ability to harvest cheap resources. Any change to the status quo had to be crushed not only to keep the peace in the West but also to expand free market capitalism to the worlds developing nations. The nations of South America were crippled by violent Western intervention which helped to establish severely divided production relations under which extremely cheap labor and the rapid depletion of natural resources would become the norm. (Klein, 2007) These nations served as an example of both the benefits and tragedies of what can happen if class struggle succeeds. Through struggle, equality had become a real possibility but that possibility was annihilated when the citizens of these countries were violently reminded, through the rise of Western backed dictators and corrupt free market ideologies that even if they manage to defeat their own nation’s oppressions, there is a much larger enemy looming, the enemy of global capitalism.

It is important to recognize the role of the state throughout this discussion. Misuse and exploitation of state power by the capitalist class is essential for capitalisms survival and it is important to examine how the state extends capitalist ideologies throughout society. The circumstances under which nature, the tools used to manipulate nature, and the human labor used to operate those tools come together define the means of production. (Singh, 2000) The means of production then go on to represent the infrastructure of society and that infrastructure goes on to represent the superstructure, or the state. (Singh, 2000) In a capitalist society the ideologies that shape the circumstances under which the means of production arise are representative of the capitalist class. This means that the ideas and the form of the state are largely attributable to the ideologies of the minority bourgeois class. (Marx and Engels, 1986) The state then becomes the platform on which the ruling class asserts their common interests. Under capitalism this means that the capitalist class passes its affairs off as the affairs of the entire nation when in reality, because the state is controlled by capitalists, it is only interested in capitalist interests. (Marx and Engels, 1986)

This helps to explain the violent nature of a capitalist controlled state. As any one body or any organization in a position of power must defeat its opposition to remain in power, so to must a capitalist state destroy those opposed to its interests. This can be done through dominant ideologies which are passed off as in the interest off all peoples. (Marx and Engels, 1986) Unfortunately these lies are often bought by the laboring class, particularly in the West. This can also be done, as it has in many developing countries, through violence which is, many times, provoked and disturbed by Western powers that are aware that opposition to their capitalist fantasies cannot be crushed quickly enough. In many ways this is definitive of the Cold War as capitalism sought to destroy its most deviant threat; socialism. (Singh, Lecture: March 4, 2008)

It is not surprising that much of America’s journeys abroad during the Cold War were directed at the fabricated threat of communism. If America’s citizens could be convinced, and even if they could not be it was necessary to crush any glimpses of communism both abroad and at home. It is not alarming either, that as the Cold War began to grind to a halt and Capitalism began to grab the upper hand through all its boorish and violent tactics, the laissez faire concept began to spread behind the will of startlingly relentless capitalist diplomats such as Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. (Klein, 2007) This spread is marked in the West with massive layoffs to striking government employees such as the mass lay offs of 11,400 air-traffic controllers in the United States. (Klein, 2007) And it was seen in the developing world in countries like Bolivia and Poland, through shocking economic policies pushed through by top American economists with the promise that it would resurrect the countries struggling economy. Unfortunately these policies did nothing more than free markets from governmental control and allow wealthy capitalists to scavenge any money making monopolies from the citizens of these countries leaving them devastatingly poor. (Klein, 2007) As Klein (2007) states:

“No longer inspirational examples, these countries were now terrifying warnings about what happens to poor nations that think they can pull themselves out of the Third World.” (Klein, 2007:132)

Although what was done with these economic policies was not directly violent, they created extreme poverty and can be held responsible for massive amounts of death and suffering throughout the world. Capitalism was created through a violent class struggle in which war was a central figure. (Singh, Lecture: February 19, 2008) Capitalism needed violence to be created; now it needs violence, whether it is through conniving economic tactics or full-on military adventures to survive.

In order to fully understand the states functioning under capitalism one must be aware of the dominant ideologies that permeate every facet of society. These ideologies underpin the ways in which the production relations are established and controlled, they must be fundamentally believed in throughout society if citizens are to actively partake in capitalism. These ideologies also represent the underlying actions and beliefs of the state. As much as values and norms such as, freedom, individualism, equality, and material prosperity helped to shape capitalism they are also reproduced and enhanced through capitalist production. Ideologies are continually produced and enhanced through the same production relations under which goods and services are produced, therefore it is impossible to find dissenting ideologies at the forefront in any capitalist controlled state. (Singh, 2000) These capitalist ideologies are not the ideologies of the whole society; they are only the ideologies of the capitalist class. However, in order to avoid massive class conflict and to demean the ever existent class struggle the capitalist class, through control of the state, must convince the whole of society that the current systems ideologies under which severely divided production relations and massive class contradictions are evident, are in everybody’s interest. (Marx and Engels, 1986)

The problem for the laboring class is that these capitalist interests that have been sold to them as beneficial for everyone only serve to exploit them and to ensure that they remain expropriated from the means of production. These ideologies promise freedom, equality, and material prosperity yet they have delivered enslavement, exploitation, extreme poverty, violence and death on an almost unimaginable scale. (Singh, Lecture: March 4, 2008) The capitalist system is designed so that it cannot deliver what its leaders have promised, it can only deliver positive outcomes for the capitalist class and only at the expense of almost an entire world of laborers seeking to sell their dignity for a crumb leftover from the capitalist gorge-fest.

The entire worlds laboring class has been severely affected by their belief in these false ideologies. Although some laboring classes, particularly in the West are better off than those in the developing world where the act of selling your labor can be a challenging one, all laboring classes are being exploited. (Singh, Lecture: March 4, 2008) This exploitation is a necessary function of capitalism, the result of this necessity is: “The impoverishment of growing numbers of people, and an increasing gap in life-circumstances between the capitalist and the laborer.” (Marx and Engels, 1986:13)

These dire circumstances are no more evident than in Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Although the communist government was less than ideal it did not allow its citizens to slip to the depths of despair as the capitalist system that was later implemented did. The devastation Russia’s laboring class felt can be summed up with the following statistics:

“By 1998, more than 80 percent of Russian farms had gone bankrupt, and roughly seventy thousand state factories had closed, creating an epidemic of unemployment. In 1989 before shock therapy, (erratically implemented free market economic policies) 2 million people in the Russian Federation were living in poverty, on less than $4 a day. By the time the shock therapists had administered their “bitter medicine” in the mid-nineties, 74 million Russians were living below the poverty line, according to the World Bank.” (Klein, 2007: 286)

This shows the severity of what can happen when capitalist ideologies are passed off as in the interest of all. The capitalist world hugely benefited from this startling transformation of Russia’s economy, the world moved one step closer to being dominated by capitalist interests and left in the wake of this perceived progress were millions of lost and ruined lives.

Throughout all the above discussion it is obvious that in order for capitalism to exist as anything but a shell of its current self, shrewd exploitation, corruption, and violence are necessary ingredients. The very fabric of a capitalist system requires human worth to be reduced into exchange value. (Singh, Lecture: February 19, 2008) Capitalists do not see the human beings who labor to make their great wealth possible as valuable. They are simply a replaceable tool in reaching a fantastical desired end. If should they suffer, lose their lives, or have their entire countries raped and sacrificed in the name of the capitalist religion it is of no concern to the capitalist elite. This is the process of capitalist expansion; it is unavoidable if the current system is aloud to reign free. The inner workings of capitalist functions are startling when uncovered, as such Klein (2007) in her discussion of the inhumanity experienced in the core of South America in the 1970’s asks,

“Is neo-liberalism an inherently violent ideology, and is there something about its goals that demand this cycle of brutal political cleansing, followed by human rights cleanup operations.” (Klein, 2007: 151)

The answer to that question is yes, neo-liberalism is inherently violent. Since neo-liberalism is merely a more radical, more laissez faire driven approach to capitalism and capitalism in its functioning in the outside world is sustained through violence, so to are its ideological extensions.

If one can look clearly at the areas where the capitalist world has ventured to exploit material resources one can see that these areas more often than not become engulfed in war and poverty. (Singh, Lecture: February 26, 2008) The answer to this or the key question arising out of this can be seen in the quote from Klein (2007) directly above. Political cleansing is needed in these areas if the capitalist world is to separate a developing country from its resources. Capitalism cannot take from a country that believes its resources are best used serving its people, therefore it is the job of the capitalists to transform the political landscape in that country, in doing so the countries valuables will be made ripe for the picking. Whether this political cleansing is done through ideological genocide as it was in Chile or Indonesia or through harsh economic reform as It was in Russia or Poland the outcome seems to be the same; the production relations are divided as far as can be and capitalist ideologies such as freedom, equality, and material prosperity are instilled in the political landscapes. This creates a cooperative and sustaining environment under which the capitalist world can exploit as it needs to.

Political cleansing as it is engaged in by Capitalism is no different in its mission, to eradicate opposition, than ethnic cleansing which has resulted in some of the most catastrophic tragedies in human history. It is unfortunate that we do not look at political cleansing in the same light as we view the ethnic cleansings of Rwanda or Sudan. Both forms of cleansing produce the same dire results, mass destruction, poverty, and death, only political cleansing comes with the promise of enhanced capitalist opportunities.

If capitalism continues to tear the world apart at its current pace, every citizen, even the capitalist elite will be faced with exceptionally difficult circumstances. Violence cannot reign forever, where there is injustice, justice is not far behind and gaining evidence as it makes up ground, those who sew evil will eventually reap it. There is no question as to whether or not capitalism will fall; the only question is when it will fall and how. Those are circumstances over which we still have control and as such it is imperative that citizens find a way to continue the class struggle that birthed and will eventually end capitalisms reign. The majority laboring classes must find a way to struggle past the violence they will be faced with when they attempt to grasp at more equal production relations. Capitalism can fall and still leave some standing if the struggle for state control is in the hands of majority interests. (Singh, Lecture: February 19, 2008) Despite the fact that our lives seem so engulfed in the capitalist way of life and that the beast of capitalism looms so large it is still possible to move beyond. To move ahead will require sacrifice as those who currently hold power will not retreat without a massive spectacle. However, I firmly believe that the majority holds the power, they have just been tricked into thinking they are powerless. The process of unlearning and being weaned off of the sedatives administered by the capitalist state will be a long and strenuous one in which the true nature of capitalism will have to be revealed for all to see. I believe that if this can be done and done before capitalism declines from its climax, the predicted Marxist progression which saw capitalism supplanted by communism through a class struggle can become reality. This is the only real hope for the well-being of the world’s citizens and it is necessary to believe this to be possible.

Flex Your Head

I was sitting in lecture today, the only one i find remotely interesting or purposeful, and my professor mentioned the deterioration of the social safety nets in North America. Things like welfare, health care, pensions, etc. He was arguing that policies that allow people to access these things are necessary because as new technology gets developed more and more people lose their livelihoods. That's not the only reason for job loss, but it's one of the systemic reasons.

This got me thinking, I'm at the point in my life where i need to make difficult decisions that will more than likely impact the rest of my future, i need to find a "career" or a profession of some sort so that i can eat and sleep under some sort of adequate shelter. I think a lot of kids jump right into this, they take jobs doing some sort of trade or working for a company they believe can provide them with a decent income doing mind numbing work. I know in some cases it's just a stop-gap solution but in a lot of cases it's a lifelong commitment. Given the volatility of the economy and the way in which the workplace has been drastically altered in the past twenty or so years, it's difficult to see any line of work, outside of ones that provide for the basic services of society, being a sure thing in the long term.

I don't know where this is going, but the point is instead of putting all your pennies in one jar or honing a particular trade, (not that there's anything wrong with this) harvest your mind. If you think about it, your job can be yanked out from under your feet, your livelihood destroyed and you can be left with nothing if you have nothing to fall back on. If you harvest your mind or "flex your head" so to speak, regularly, nobody, nothing can take that away. You might not have any material value left but at least your most valuable aspect will be intact and you'll have your dignity. I'll use an example of Puerto Rican immigrants who moved to East Harlem in the mid 1900's and started working in garment factories. They're whole identity become tied up in these factories, not only was it their livelihood, it was who they were, without those jobs they had no place staked out in American society. Those factories left for free trade zones and cheap labor and those workers and their families went spiraling into poverty, then came drug use and gangs and all the rest. I know East Harlem was a racialized area before they arrived and there were a lot of other dynamics outside of their engulfment in their work that led to the hardships they face today but still it's an example of the devastation job loss can have.

It's frustrating seeing so many kids at university shutting off their true ability to think. Most people are too concerned with how much money they'll make or how much "prestige" their degree will give them, which is just stupid. They might do well for themselves, more than likely they'll make more money than i ever will but their heads will be dormant capsules of self indulgence and morbid disregard for the world around them. Start thinking about the world, it's internal dynamics and your place in it and how you can do little or big things to make it better and worries about how your going to make a living seem so insignificant. If you give all of yourself that you can manage to give to those purposes things will fall in line, the world still has a place for selflessness and people who give out of pureness and not some distraught motivations.

If you don't exercise your mind you wont have any capacity to to be a positive force in the world, you'll just be another pawn, produced by the system, maintained by the system, and ultimately killed by the system. That's the vast majority of people, it sucks. Use your brain, not your biceps, don't bother breaking your back for an employee that will regurgitate you like a bad meal the second things get hard. I know, i know i have no right to say anything because i haven't experienced the real world to its fullest most brutal extent. I breathe the same air, my eyes and ears are working at full capacity, there's a difference between idealism and truth.

The First Step are a great youth crew band and i really relate to their lyrics, here are the lyrics to a song from their "What We Know " LP that speaks to what i said above:

"Get Wise"

Out on the street I come face to face
With what little concern we have for the others, in this human race.
You can choose the view you want to see but
It's harder to care than to live in apathy!

JUST GET WISE!

When it's ten years later and we've had our turn
Will our foundation crack or will it stand firm?

Poverty, hunger, addiction and disease.
I want to lend a hand to those in need.
I hear the critics but I know these thoughts are real
And I know part of you feels the way i feel!
I'll open my eyes and just get wise.
And live my life so that suffering may cease.
I'll live my life so one may walk in peace!

Destroy. Destroy. Destroy.

Anyone with eyes or ears, or any one of their senses for that matter, knows that there is an inordinate amount of violence in this world. There are wars and genocides outside of the Western world, inside the Western world, particularly in the U.S there are an obscene amount of homicides and psychotic gun wielding citizens. Most worrisome of all the most violent, militaristic government in the world and really in history resides in the bottom half of North America.

I'm saying all this because i think that most of violence in the world can be traced back to capitalist enterprises. Particularly with this new era of neo-liberal thought dominating the political landscape. If you've ever studied the birth and progression of capitalism you know that it's pretty hard to argue that capitalisms driving force doesn't lie within the capitlist class's ability to manipulate and exploit the laboring class. This exploitation creates conflict between these two groups, nobody likes to be exploited and usually if people find out they're being used they'll attempt to do something about. That's where the whole Communist Manifesto and Karl Marx comes in. I won't even get into that.

If you trace modern capitalism and then, i believe if you trace the violence and wars that have taken place in the world since it's inception they can be attributed to one or two things, a lot of the time these things are combined. One, the capitalist classes struggle to maintain their grip on the means of production, in other words their struggle to keep the laborers away from controlling how the factories are run, how goods and services are distributed and produced, and what is done with the surplus of goods that is created, etc. And two Colonialism and Imperialism. There have been two waves of this. The first starting with "exploration" and the discovering of the "new world" and the second, really, post WWII wave with the Unites States attempting to builds its mega empire on the expropriation of resources from countries in which the U.S military or the CIA overthrew progressive socialist governments in favor of brutal dictators who would allow their businessmen to by up anything worth anything that belonged to that country. Obviously this is a complicated process and i in no way did a good job explaining it but those are the two processes that i think are responsible for most of the violence and death in the world.

I'll try to give examples of these processes. An example of the colonial or imperial process would be the IMF, which was created by the United States to "help" third world and developing countries out of debt. The IMF will lend a developing country money in order for them to develop their infrastructure, so things like roads and industry. However, that money is only given with the stipulation that the companies that the given countries government hires to build this infrastructure have a certain high level of profitability. This eliminates the ability for any companies within the country itself to benefit and basically puts the money back into the hands it came from. Now the developing nation is in a helpless state of debt and it has developed infrastructure reliant enough to harvest valuable resources. I think this happens a lot in Africa, i know it has in Uganda, and we know what happens when countries become devastatingly poor, disease, famine, starvation, civil wars and corrupt governments. This is a different newer form of imperialism because due to globalization, a country no longer needs to send its military forces into a country to control it, they can do it through massive and corrupt economic transactions.

An example of the second process can be found in many South American and South East
Asian countries. The case of Chile is probably the most infamous. Where, much to the chagrin of the Americans the country was developing a socialist government whose aim was to nationalize resources. This isn't good for Capitalist countries because without cheap resources they'll lose much of their wealth. This is when the CIA started recruiting young Chilean University students to learn neo-liberal economics at the university of Chicago. They did this because they decided to become friends with General Pinochet, the violent leader of the opposition party in Chile, they would fund his overthrow of the current Chilean government and then install their Chicago trained sheep at important posts of the government. Anyway, Pinochet bombed and shot his way into power and them proceeded to perform an ideological genocide, killing or torturing any remnant socialist thinkers or activists. This happened all over South America, in Argentina, Bolivia, and Peru to name a few and in Indonesia in Southeast Asia. Millions and Millions of people dead and Millions more to come because somebody had to have their money.

It's no coincidence the U.S spends more money on the military than pretty much the rest of the world combined. The capitalists need to protect their interests, if anyone so much as suggests socialism or economic equality is a good idea, it can't stand because ideas like that bring people together and mean less money for countless morbidly obese, gluttonous, gray haired old men and more money for the single mother and her two kids living on food stamps. But don't worry it's justified because poor people are just stupid and lazy, obscenely rich people are angels themselves who would never so much as bend a hair on someones head. Nobody has any blood on their hands, it's survival of the fittest. Tell that to the countless graves, I'm sure if death could speak it would rupture every ear drum on earth with its response.

This is really long winded and if you got the bottom and are reading this you're either really confused because my writing made no sense or you're disgusted with anger because you think I'm a communist. I'm not. I just like the color red, a lot, probably too much.

I leave you with the lyrics to a great song by Blue Monday, that band embodied everything i love about punk music. The singer now sings in Circles and is one of the best lyricists in hardcore punk right now, check out both bands if you haven't already.

Bereaved

Black smoke a shroud over the city the epicenter is sullen no movement at all. While they hide in wretched shelter and smother their babies into breast. A clandestine murmur of sorrow resonated in the streets. When the sun rises in they pull their dead from the rubble. They pull their children from beneath the fucking rubble. And another world away a mother drops to the floor raises her face to the sky and cries "what the fuck for?" And those in power lead this masquerade to them it's only a game. As the innocent suffer. Religious zealots capitalize on these times spreading their drivel and lies. As the innocent suffer. Propaganda euphemizes brutality keeping the masses in line. As the innocent suffer. Nationalist lies create the perfect disguise for economic plunder. As the innocent suffer.