The Veiled Civil War of Political Capitalism, by Rick Gunderman

Today I read a post by a “neo-libertarian” (my suspicions indicate that this is a fusion of paleoconservatism and neoliberalism) blogger about how a roadway in California and the infamous Interstate 35W bridge in Minneapolis are both set to be fixed ahead of time. Supposedly, this was done because the respective governments deregulated their infrastructure policies and allowed the holy “invisible hand” of the laissez-faire capitalist market to work its magic.

I don’t know the veracity of the post, but I will give “Crush Liberalism” the benefit of the doubt (for now). Indeed, the very argument he makes is not the focus of this post.

The focus of this post can begin with the name of the blog that I stumbled across.

Presumably, this self-proclaimed neolibertarian’s goal is to crush liberalism, unless I am grossly misreading his blog’s name. It would logically follow that as someone who wishes to crush liberalism and voices support for the “free market”, he is sympathetic to the right-wing of capitalism.

Perhaps a series of definition which will serve as parameters for this post are necessary:

- I don’t simply define political theory on a simple left-right spectrum: I add an up-down (respectively authoritarian-libertarian) dimension to it in the vein of politicalcompass.org. As such, anything “right-wing” to me is anything capitalistic. The more right-wing, the more capitalist.

- Despite their own claims, I do believe libertarians are right-wing.

- Conversely, I don’t consider liberals or social democrats to be left-wing, as they demonstrate variably heavy or weak support for the capitalist system, seeking only to “augment”, “fix”, or “reform” it. In my mind, to be left-wing is to advocate the complete (not partial) abolition of capitalism. Social democrats are, at best, “left of centre”, but not left.

- Taking the previous two points into consideration, capitalist opposition to “liberalism” would seem to come from a force more right-wing than liberals. This is one reason why I consider libertarians right-wing.

With that out of the way…

Anybody with any knowledge of the political climate in Anglo (and, to a lesser extent, Franco) North America would not disagree that the typical divisions of left and right are reserved in public debate for liberals and conservatives respectively.

Like I said, if liberals are indeed “left” in a true sense they would call for an abolition of capitalism.

To be fair, liberals differ from conservatives in their desire to change the capitalist system insofar as it becomes fair or humane. This does not, however, make them “left” in the grand scheme of things. Instead, this makes them left in a purely capitalistic sense.

Let’s suppose that capitalist ideology itself can be divided along a left-right axis. On the left are the liberals and on the right are the conservatives. This axis would simply be a component of the larger spectrum which would include anarchists, socialists, Trotskyists, Marxists, Leninists, fascists, Nazis and the like.

Considering that there appears to be virtually no serious debate on fundamental political or economic changes, we can conclude that capitalism has a stranglehold on politics – at least in North America, where serious socialist parties are never included in public debates.

And so, the Liberals/Democrats and Conservatives/Republicans trading insults, pumping themselves up, and making a bunch of easy-to-keep but easier-to-break promises, this is called “politics”. No wonder voter turnout is ridiculously low!

But this points to an interesting phenomenon, at least for me. As they are fighting each other, the only involvement that non-capitalist political philosophy has in the debate is as an ad hominem. Who hasn’t heard the NDP or Liberals slammed as “socialists” or, worse yet, “communists”?

The Liberals and NDP respond by making themselves appear as non-socialist or non-communist as possible because they are both, after all, parties of the capitalist system. They would rather alienate voters who might side with a party that has a bold, socialist approach to politics than appear as anything less than sponsors of the current system.

If these parties all have capitalist programs, why do they continue to bicker so?

The only conclusion I can make is that capitalism is in a state of semi-clandestine civil war.

The sides are not always clearly distinguishable, and it’s not always a two-sided war. I do believe that they can be generally classified into four camps: “liberal”, “social democratic”, “conservative” and “libertarian”.

The liberal side adheres to social liberalism, a step more authoritarian than social libertarianism but generally a freedom-oriented line. They wish to limit the scope of government involvement in the daily lives of the people, and generally believe that a big bureaucratic government is necessary to equalize capitalism.

Social democrats are similar but take most of those points further. They often push for social programs like universal health care and public education and are generally closer to social libertarianism. While they are called “socialists” by their capitalist colleagues, they are (reluctant) supporters of the capitalist system, believing it can be harnessed for the good of the people.

Conservatives contrast, at least in a social sense, to liberals. They are generally more authoritarian and are bent on infusing a “moral agenda” into politics, often fueled by adherence to Judeo-Christian values, such as criminalization of drug use, homosexual marriage or activity, prostitution and the like. Morally objective as opposed to morally relative. They are often more purely capitalistic, pushing a government small enough to allow free corporate reign but big enough to restrict personal activity.

Libertarians take the social ideology of social democrats and the economic thought of conservatives and blend it into a motley mixture of free market worship and “live and let live” social thought. They generally believe that such things as police, education, medical attention and even the courts are best left in the hands of private investors looking to make a profit. Seriously. Unlike their three comrades, they are not generally well-represented in mainstream politics, often portraying themselves as the radicals in a field of elites.

These capitalist forces all battle each other out, in and out of election season, often accusing the other of adherence to non-capitalist ideology as an attack.

Should socialists rejoice at this? Have I stumbled across the truth behind society’s worst-kept secret: that all major political parties that would be worth voting for by virtue of possessing a real chance to win are in fact the same? Have we discovered divisions in the capitalist front that we can exploit to our pleasure, perhaps leading to a rise in socialist thought?

Maybe, maybe not. Probably not. They may spar frequently, but if the experience of attempts at socialism in the world tell us anything, it’s that they don’t hesitate to unite when they see a common threat. Example?

The Toronto Transit Commission workers went on strike not long ago. For the first time in Ontario history the provincial Legislature was recalled on a Sunday and it took them a mere half an hour to pass legislation forcing the strikers back to work. The Progressive Conservatives unsurprisingly voted for this, the Liberals in their typical working-class betrayal tendencies voted for this, and even the New Democrats (proving once again that they are for the working people only at election time) voted for this. Must have been a real shocker for the unions who’ve donated tons of money to support the latter two parties!

The TTC workers were striking for job security, retention of their benefits, and a small wage increase to keep pace with Mississauga transit workers. On top of that, the Toronto Star reported that ” A Toronto Star investigation published this year showed that a growing number of front-line TTC workers are beaten, threatened, spit upon and verbally abused by the public, putting their rate of post-traumatic stress above that of Ontario police officers.”

Of course, in the wake of the capitalist parties’ speedy oppression of the TTC strike there has been a wave of anti-worker hysteria sweeping Toronto. People from all walks of life condemn the TTC workers for daring to stand up for their rights. And it’s hard to blame them, not because they’re right (they’re not), but such is the power of the alliance of the corporate mass media and the capitalist politicians to convince everyone that the workers caused this chaos and not unfair practices by the City of Toronto and the Government of Ontario. For a series of excellent stories and analysis on the matter, click here.

Another one?

Although I must emphasize my anti-Bolshevism, I cannot deny that at the time of the October Revolution they were fighting in the name of the workers. The coalition against them, the “Whites”, were in fact not monarchists but a loose coalition of anti-working class forces. The only other major opposition groups to the rise of the Bolsheviks were Nestor Makhno’s Ukrainian anarchist Black Army, whom the Whites also fought. The rest were small, local forces spread across the vast Russian Empire.

Lastly?

The anarchist Spanish Revolution of 1936 where the workers seized control of the means of production in much of Spain, including 75% of the economy in Catalonia. There was no overbearing authoritarian government like what the USSR had almost immediately degenerated into. Nevertheless, count on a coalition of “Nationalists” led by the infamous Francisco Franco to brutally oppress the anarchists and ultimately seize power, assisted by the “Republican” refusal to side with the anarchists.

Even if the discovery of the Capitalist Civil War doesn’t mean an easy victory for the people, it still exposes that capitalism is fraught with the same divisions that socialists are. If they refuse to unite, perhaps we should unite under a loose program that guarantees individual liberty, political freedom and an economy for the people.

Or else we run the risk of continually being just a buzz word used by the capitalists to attack each other.

~ by redrising on May 6, 2008.