💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › rob-los-ricos-class-dismissed.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 13:40:20. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Class Dismissed Author: Rob los Ricos Date: Fall/Winter 2004–5 Language: en Topics: anarchy, class struggle, marxism, feudalism, elitism, revolution, green anarchy Source: Green Anarchy #18
“…As late as 1700, the prevailing European social system was still one
in which vast power, the greater part of landed wealth, and the prime
control of political life belonged to the hereditary landed
aristocracy…the factor of continuity – of the perpetuation down to the
modern industrial world of a one-class social structure, or, in another
phrasing, of the domination of a landed aristocracy – is one of the
fundamental facts and continuing conditions of the history of western
civilization.”
–Norman F. Cantor, The Civilization of the Middle Age
Despite delusions to the contrary, since its inception, civilization has
nurtured only one class – the ruling class. Attempts to divide civilized
societies into sub-divisions such as middle or working classes miss this
essential point. The parts of society which do not comprise the elite
don’t matter. The single focus of every element in civilized societies
is the creation and perpetuation of wealth and privilege for the benefit
of an elite. The unfortunate masses left out of the elite ranks are
insignificant. Our lives pass with little notice. We are interchangeable
parts of an inhuman system. We could be slaves, conquered by the armed
forces of the elite. Either from foreign lands, or from the homeland. We
could be wage slaves. Whatever the level of coercion, anyone who doesn’t
serve the interests of the elite are seen as deviant, undesirable, and
dealt with as such.
The rise of the bourgeoisie in European societies was part of a process
of liberalization of wealth that Karl Marx saw as potentially liberating
for those who create the privileges and material abundance for the
ruling elite to enjoy. Marx’s followers, however, never desired anything
beyond taking the place of the ruling elite themselves.
Let’s face facts: people who are compelled to toil for the benefit of
others are slaves. The end result of working-class rebellion is not the
abolition of slavery, but would only result in putting the slave in
control of slavery. This is not a good deal for most people. The reason
working people fall for this proposition at all is because there has
been little or no questioning of the false promise of industrial society
– unlimited material abundance – at least not in the more advanced
industrial states.
The proponents of class struggle whole-heartedly accept industrial
society as the right and proper way of life. The benefits generated
through the exploitation of natural and human resources make the costs
of such exploitation bearable, desirable even. Here in the 21^(st)
century, the ecological, psychological, spiritual, and social costs of
industrialism are becoming increasingly and unavoidably obvious, even to
the most willfully ignorant, and the benefits portioned out to a
dwindling percentage of the public.
To clarify things: Industrial Society is not the end-all and be-all of
human endeavor. It crushes people into rigid social roles that — by
themselves — are dehumanizing. Since working class slaves are destroyed
as people, they cannot be expected to behave in healthy, life-affirming
ways. That’s why nowadays, abusive, self-destructive behavior is so
commonplace: dysfunctional families, sexual abuse, suicide, drug
addiction. How can the majority of the population be expected to relate
to other people in a healthy, respectful manner when every aspect of
their existence brings them humiliation, powerlessness, pain, and abuse?
Industrialism is not the answer to any of modern civilization’s ills,
nor will it produce remedies to the devastation it causes.
Capitalism did not evolve slowly from medieval mercantilism over
generations; it was manufactured in the English countryside when people,
derided by the elite as “commoners”, were forced into destitution. Their
access to lands their ancestors had utilized for centuries (the commons)
was denied them. Prior to that, most people were able to meet their
needs through the efforts of their own hands. People did not give up
their ability to live self-sufficiently and take up wage-slavery
voluntarily. It was forced on them through overwhelming military power.
Luddite rebellions against Industrialism didn’t come until later
(1800–1820). The original, primary battle to establish capitalism was
over access to land. Class-based “revolutionary” movements have yet to
grasp this, the single most important aspect to the fight against
Capital. Yet peoples’ demands for land to utilize for their sustenance
has fueled revolutionary movements since the 1640’s on every continent
contaminated by Capital’s touch.
Tremendous amounts of wealth – accumulated over generations, centuries
even – were plundered from people around the world by European armies,
mercenaries, and adventurers. The first global empire was that of
16^(th) century Spain, by the way.
This vast wealth was used to initiate capitalism. It funded the
construction of massive factories and the seizure of the commons.
The aristocracy abolished common law. They refused to acknowledge the
commoners’ ages-old rights because these rights weren’t recognized by
law – written laws utilized by the courts. It helped their cause that
the Lords were often the judges too. It also didn’t hurt that the Lords
had professional soldiers in their service, nor that factory owners and
bankers would assist them to hire mercenaries, if necessary, and arm
them.
The traditions of the commons were finally eclipsed by the cowboy
economics of the American West, wherein the first person or entity to
utilize resources for profitable enterprises could claim First Rights to
them. Thus, a mining company could divert the flow of a river to wash
away mountainsides and leave simple pastoral families and subsistence
farmers downstream with little or no water for their use. What mattered
was that distant banks and industrialists profited, not whether
homesteaders could provide for themselves and their families.
This plundering of natural resources, traditionally utilized by people
through common agreement, was legitimized through shady legal
shenanigans. These legal sleight-of-hand maneuvers form the basis on
which international trade treaties and organizations that enforce and
fund them, claim their authority. In addition to continued conquest of
lands inhabited by indigenous peoples with no “legal” title to their
homelands, the WTO and IMF/WB demand that local laws – fully established
and recognized by local courts and governments–be overturned in favor of
the interests (primarily the creation of profits) of international
corporations and banks.
The struggle over control of the means of production is all but
irrelevant to the idea of a liberated existence. Control of industry
won’t free us from capitalism. Worker-controlled industries would still
be dependent on financial institutions; we’d still be crushed into
dehumanizing industrial standardization. We’d still be forced to compete
for, even fight wars over, dwindling natural resources. We will be rid
of the shackles of capitalism when we can meet our needs without being
forced into economic servitude. For that to happen, we need to pursue
our own goal: control of land to utilize for our own needs.
In the 21^(st) century, we are living through a transformation in the
way civilization functions. The wall of lies utilized to put a liberal
face on the New World Order (NWO) is beginning to erode and the vile
face of fierce ruthlessness necessary to enforce its regime is becoming
easier to discern.
The greatest lie – the one which captivated Marx and generations of
class warriors – was that liberal, bourgeois states and capitalism would
create material abundance enough to enrich everyone and provide us all
with lives of material ease. Marx’s unrequited infatuation with
industrial society prevented him from looking behind the smoke-screen of
capitalism to see the fallacy of perpetuating its infrastructure, but
under new management. So long as people still believe in the liberal lie
of material abundance for all, they will continue to be subservient to
the interest of the elite. The International Communist Conspiracy failed
to create any sort of alternative to capitalism because they neglected
to counteract the methods used to construct it.
The three pillars of domination that prop up the NWO – overwhelming
military and economic superiority, along with a compliant, pliable
system of law – grew up alongside one another. Liberal states,
capitalism, and military power are intertwined in their development;
their evolution into a single entity during the last century makes it
impossible to imagine any one existing without the others. This suggests
that the success of one was, and still is, dependent on the others.
As things stand now, we in urban, industrialized societies are weak and
helpless dependents on the forces that have reduced our lives to
meaningless tedium. We have lost our way. We are also completely
ignorant of how to live within the planet’s biosystems to sustain
ourselves. Even sadder still, most of us are descended from a long line
of people similarly alienated from the basic knowledge or ability to
provide for ourselves without the benefit of markets. Few of us can
hunt, fish, or forage for food, or build shelters from materials at
hand, or make clothing out of raw materials. This knowledge is not
completely lost, however. Not all people have embraced industrialism,
nor have all people been assimilated by industrialism. We have allies in
our fight against capital and we desperately need to seek them out and
learn from them. Fortunately, there are religious, craft, and indigenous
societies that retain the skills and knowledge we require.
In return for learning from indigenous peoples, we need to fight
alongside them to preserve their autonomy. If they are under assault by
corporate interests (mining, logging, petroleum extraction, etc.), we
need to counter-attack.
We also need to respect the fact that they are different from us and
accept them on their own terms. We may have something worthwhile to
offer their societies, but it should be up to them to make that
determination. Whether they are Inuit, Amish, herbalists, subsistence
farmers, we must respect one another. We need each other desperately; we
are all in a fight for our lives and the lives of coming generations.
One aspect to our yearning for liberation, which works in our favor, is
that the NWO is dependent upon our consent and cooperation to function.
There certainly is a vast array of coercive pressures they can assert on
us: material comfort, social conformity, police harassment, etc. The NWO
provides us with many excuses for remaining safely within the parameters
it sets for us. When we resist these pressures, we sacrifice a lot, even
so far as to endanger our lives. If we actually manage to overcome the
NWO, we will undoubtedly lose a lot of what we take for granted in our
consumer-oriented lives. What those of us in the industrialized areas
need to keep in mind is that our lives of relative ease are dependent on
the oppression of distant people who likely have no access to technology
we take for granted. Two billion people alive right now have no access
to clean drinking water. More than 3 billion have never used a phone.
The NWO solution – sell them cell phones and Perrier – isn’t the
appropriate one. How many of us are in danger of losing our access to
technology and the means of sustenance because of economic contractions
in our countries? What our friends and allies in “underdeveloped” lands
might tell us if they could, is “All we want is to provide for ourselves
and our families. Please spare us economic development and leave us in
peace”. Rather than competing over dwindling economic resources we
should find common ground and learn how to survive without profiting
from other people’s oppression.
¡No se rende! ¡No se vende!
Rob los Ricos
Mill Creek Correctional Facility