Marx is spinning in his grave

I’m neither an economist nor an historian, but I know enough about Marx to know that none of the governments that have been established in his name followed Marx’s theories. Suffice to say that Marx taught that socialism—and eventually communism—would arise in mature capitalist economies, when the workers got tired of labor exploitation and overthrew their capitalist overlords. Marx believed that the nations most ripe for this revolution in his time were Germany and the UK.

Marx was long dead by the time Lenin and the Bolsheviks claimed his mantle in the 1917 Russian Revolution. To resolve the paradox of how a Marxist revolution is legitimate in a predominantly agrarian pre-industrial society, Lenin et al. sidestepped this inconvenience by proclaiming “socialism in one country.” IOW, socialism because we say so. Of course, the West was happy to accept the re-branding as a way of alienating Marxist economics for its workers.

In 1949, Mao and his cadre came to power in China, branding his totalitarianism as Marxism, again imposed on an agrarian and decidedly pre-industrial society. The same could be said of Hoxha’s Albania, Castro’s Cuba and Kim Il-sung’s North Korea. After WWII, socialism did come to East Germany, but that was imported on the backs of Russian tanks, not the result of a worker’s revolution.

Today’s China is neither Marxist nor Maoist. It is a government-controlled kleptocracy:

“Deng Liqun (no relation to Deng Xiaoping, China’s leader at the time, who had initiated the economic reforms) noticed that many rural businesses had started to hire a large number of workers. Deng, citing Das Kapital by Karl Marx, began to sound the alarm about the greedy capitalists extracting surpluses from the Chinese proletariat. To him, large private businesses were inherently exploitative.

 

“Deng’s warnings were ignored, but they turned out to be prescient: China’s workforce was about to get squeezed. According to official Chinese statistics, in the real economy—that is, agriculture, industry, and utilities—the share of labor compensation relative to the value of all economic inputs, such as raw materials, production components, and capital, fell from 21 percent in 1987 to 15 percent in 2023, the last year for which data are available.”

This is far from Marx’s vision of government by the proletariat. Today’s China is neither a Marxist state nor a worker’s paradise. The workers aren’t exploited by free-market capitalism, they’re exploited by state-controlled capitalism.

Of course, Marx was a creature of the 19th century. He wouldn’t recognize a world of the internet and bitcoin. And to say that there is no Marxist state today is simply a recognition of Marxist anachronism. Marx was right about the control of labor by capital, but he was risibly wrong about the mechanisms available to correct that imbalance. Indeed, in the third decade of the 21st century, the world is headed rapidly in the opposite direction.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/china/how-china-forgot-karl-marx 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Yes, the CDC can change its mind

The Nobel Laureate economist Paul Samuelson famously acknowledged in a Meet the Press interview: “Well when events change, I change my mind. What do you do?” This observation applies to the advice from medical authorities such as the CDC and WHO during the COVID pandemic. Some members of the public are fond of pillorying these agencies for having published different guidelines at different times, as though health officials are in the business of issuing ex cathedra dogma rather than responding to incomplete and ambiguous information. Science doesn’t deal in proof, it deals with the weight of evidence. A scientific hypothesis is one that is capable of being tested and falsified by experiment. I get it. I used to teach problem-based learning to first year medical students, and they often struggled with what to do with incomplete and ambiguous information, which is what physicians in clinics do every day. Sometimes, one cannot wait for all the tests to be completed and all the data analyz...
Read more

About that Trump lawsuit

So Trump is suing Rupert Murdoch for defamation because of the release of a salacious doodle. Nothing remarkable about Donald J. Trump weaponizing the legal system against his opponents, I know. But there are some things that do bear remark here: “ . . . he's suing Rupert Murdoch personally. But you know who he's not suing? Lachlan Murdoch, who's actually the chairperson of News Corp and Fox, who's actually the decision-maker. Rupert Murdoch has no official role there anymore. He's an adviser.   “So, I thought that was revealing in a lot of ways, because it isn't just about going after the entity. It's sort of this expansion spillover, trying to send as much of a message as you possibly can. He's sort of hitting every potential lever, not just against Murdoch and that empire, but then all the other media properties in the future. It's also about sending an example.” “HAYES: Yeah. That, to me, is the point here, is that these lawsuits are not lawsuits...
Read more

I agree with RFK Jr.

Though it feels weird to say it, RFK Jr and I agree on something: curtailing direct-to-consumer marketing of pharmaceuticals. “ The Trump administration is discussing policies that would make it harder and more expensive for pharmaceutical companies to advertise directly to patients, in a move that could disrupt more than $10 billion in annual ad spending.   Although the US is the only place, besides New Zealand, where pharma companies can directly advertise, banning pharma ads outright could make the administration vulnerable to lawsuits, so it’s instead focusing on cutting down on the practice by adding legal and financial hurdles, according to people familiar with the plans who weren’t authorized to speak publicly on the matter.   “The two policies the administration has focused in on would be to require greater disclosures of side effects of a drug within each ad — likely making broadcast ads much longer and prohibitively expensive — or removing the industry’s ability to d...
Read more