ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Politics & Political Science

FREEDOM : the communist view

Updated on March 28, 2018
lady liberty
lady liberty | Source

I posted a tweet at #myfreedomday the other day, which reads ' Freedom means my freedom to lead a life consonant with The PRINCIPLE of HEALTHY & MEANINGFUL LIVING ' . It means the life of my choice must be free from exploitation, poverty, privation, domination, deprivation, and all sorts of injustice. This sort of free life is NOT possible in a capitalist society. Why ? Well, the reason is capitalism means the exploitation of millions, the 99%, by the rich and the super-rich few, the 1%. The capitalist owns money ( capital ) while workers, the unmoneyed 99%, each own labour-power, a sort of commodity, as communists view it, which, if provided with necessary raw materials and the technology needed, can create all other commodities. The capitalist, the buyer of labour-power of certain hours' duration, parts with his money that goes to the labourer who thus receives his wages ( price of his labour-power of that specific duration ). the capitalist after having bought it, happens to be the lawful owner of it, and so he's also the lawful owner of all the products of labour of that duration just as the buyer of an LED bulb also lawfully owns the illumination it produces. This is, in short and simple terms, the capitalist mode of exploitation of wage workers by the capitalist class. There's nothing wrong, by economic logic, with it.

Then, why on earth should communists' opposition to capitalism deserve to be viewed as right ?

The main objection to the exploitative economy is the fact that it leads to the concentration of wealth in a few hands at one pole, which creates the pauperism of millions at the other. And the gulf between the rich and the poor millions is irresistible and keeps on widening with the passage of time. According to the Oxfam International's latest report on the global wealth disparity, the ' [r]ichest 1 percent bagged 82 percent of wealth created last year - poorest half of humanity got nothing '. This reflects the grim reality we live in. What appears to be the most disgusting and distressing is the fact that the poor and penniless millions that sweat blood to produce all wealth and luxuries but lead a hard and humble existence themselves were all born poor and penniless, which made them join the ranks of wage slaves and thus consent to wage slavery, which evidently shows that poor and penniless millions are NOT to blame for their ignominious plight while the fact that the rich and the super-rich were all born rich and super-rich to exploit the born poor and thus grow richer and richer is NOT attributable to any noble acts or creditable achievements of theirs. Thus, it should be clear as day to the sensible that the exploitation of wage workers by capitalists is the first cause of what I view as the greatest and gravest social INJUSTICE, namely, the fact that the born poor and penniless millions are NOT to blame for their pathetic plight while the born rich and the born super-rich canNOT deserve any credit for their affluence and enviable status.

Another most serious objection to capitalism is the fact that while capitalism steadfastly refuses to throw open its lawful roads to riches, it has NO dearth of the allure of easy money through illicit means and practices. And this allure of easy money seems to be far stronger than the seduction of the sexiest femme fatale. None of us are really immune to it. There's no assurance that you yourself or a beloved one of yours isn't going to give in to it to resort to corrupt and illicit means to make easy money, then be found out someday, and land up in a jail finally. Thus, what capitalism in essence is ought to be clear as day to the sensible now.

The capitalists are NOT wrong to exploit the wage slaves that have consented, because they've got no better choice, to be exploited just as it's not wrong of you to breathe in, as you're left with no other option, the polluted air and fall sick terminally. What I view as outright wrong and rank stupidity is contributing to the pollution of air and not taking corrective measures meant to prevent air pollution and purify air. There's NO good reason why the sensible and civilised who are for living a free life should not be opposed outright to capitalism.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Prakash RnP profile image

      Prakash RnP 3 weeks ago from INDIA

      Thank you, Eric. You have certainly pointed to an important point. According to the materialistic conception of history, the foundation theory of communism, it's fully developed capitalism that can be replaced by communism. Vietnam was, like Russia in 1917 and China during 1949-1950, a most backward country of the world, and so it needed capitalism or welfare capitalism for its development, NOT communism. Transition to communism from capitalism before the latter has reached its zenith is NOT possible. To have a concept of this foundation theory of communism, you may have a look at my essay the HAMMER & SICKLE emblem : What does it signify ? ( ). The activities of Lenin, Stalin, and Mao were in direct conflict with the theory of communism.

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 3 weeks ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      When I worked in Vietnam during the advent of Doi Moi the wealth and power were held by closer to .5%. They seemed to recognize that letting the people have more would yield more for them.

      I wonder why they chose to go closer to capitalism than more communistic.

      It is an interesting study.