Why I Am A Communist

RightsWhenever any moral, ethical, political, oron striking till they get to eight hours." ["Eight
even economic question comes up, there is oftenHours Must Come," by Robert Green Ingersoll.]
a question of rights involved. "Does the womanAdam Smith noted that in China, the condition of
have the 'right' to abort her fetus?" or "Does athe worker is so degraded, that families are
man have the 'right' to kiss women he is notforced to live in boats, and would welcome a
involved with?" or "Do corporations have the 'right'stinking, putrid piece of meat as a godsend. He
to avoid paying livable wages?" Whatever italso noted that the wealth is so concentrated in
comes down to, there is always the question ofthe hands of the few, that families have to
rights. In Capitalism, there is one distinguishing right:drown their infant children in water, because they
the right to private property. In this system, acannot feed them. ["Wealth of Nations," by Adam
person can offer their property for sale at ANYSmith, chapter 8.] Thomas Malthus also noticed
price, can offer ANY price for the property theythis, "the custom of exposing children, which, in
want. It doesn't mean that someone will buy it, ortimes of distress, is probably more frequent than
that someone will accept their offer. They simplyis ever acknowledged to Europeans. Relative to
have this one right: to set any price for thethis barbarous practice, it is difficult to avoid
property they are selling, or to offer any price forremarking, that there cannot be a stronger proof
the property they wish to acquire. That is theof the distresses that have been felt by mankind
basic premise of Capitalism.Communism, orfor want of food, than the existence of a custom
Socialism, (at least the type that I am promoting)that thus violates the most natural principle of the
would curtail this economic right. What are thehuman heart." ["An Essay on the Principle of
justifications or reasons for it? Well, there arePopulation," by Thomas Malthus, Chapter 4.]Even
two that I shall further elaborate upon... First, Itoday, the condition of the workers is horrid.
believe that Communism is more capable ofWorkers are paid between 4% and 20% of the
elevating a person's status. Second, I believe thatwealth they produce, with an exception in the
Communism grants a right that Capitalism doesLodging industry (being closer to 37%). [U.S.
not (that is, the right to the wealth of your ownCensus Bureau, 1997 Economic Census,
labor). Whether these reasons are justified, I willComparative Statistics, Core Business Stastitics
try to demonstrate in a concise, powerfulSeries, EC97X-C52, issued June 2000.] This
manner, in the following paragraphs....The Ancestraltranslates to this... If a person operates machinery
Roots of Civilization and the Evolution offor a Capitalist, and produce enough products to
RightsWhen looking at society today, at the bigmake his employer $100,000, the worker -- that
factories and the various outlet stores, and seeingis, to say, the person who built the machinery,
all that has come technologically, it can onlywho operated it, and then sold it -- would receive
fascinate the human imagination. I admit to lookingperhaps $15,000. But, this is given the best case
at these wonders in awe. But, any personscenario.There are many more reasons to believe
interested in society will have certain inquiries.that this number is closer to $6,000 or $4,000.
Where did civilization come from?The RomanFor instance, if a miner was REALLY paid 12% of
Empire is sometimes regarded as the startingthe wealth they made, they would be making
point of Western Civilization, having its own roots$40,820 per year. Now, it doesn't take much
in some Greek culture (borrowing religion andunderstanding of economics to see that factory
philosophy). Here, the word "Proletariat" was firstworkers do not make this much per year. We
used, describing a soldier who went to a far offmust understand that CEOs are paid greatly, yet
land, captured slaves, and then returned home, towhat they are paid by the company is also
find that he could not find employment, due tocounted as pay roll. Robert M. Delvin, for example,
the abundance of slaves. The word "Proletariat"is Chairman, President, and CEO of American
would later be used by Marxists, to describeGeneral Corporation. He is an employee, but in
workers who had no property and could only sellone year, he made over forty five million dollars.
their labor. The number of slaves that were in[Source: The Houston Chronicle.] When his payroll
Rome during its rise cannot be known for certain,is averaged in to all the other workers, then the
for no official records were kept of slaves12% of all the wealth made by the workers
brought in to the city. But, modern historiansmeans that the median average of each worker
seem content with the idea that 1/3rd of theis about forty thousand. If Delvin worked for the
population was enslaved -- 300,000 to 350,000retail trade industry, then that would mean that
out of 900,000 to 1,000,000 people. When thefor his wage, there are 14,900 full time workers
Roman Empire fell, a new political and economicthat are being paid $5.15 per hour. Most workers
system took place known as Feudalism.Feudalismtypically receive the minimum wage, meaning they
entailed different rights and privileges. The landmake $10,712 per year. Now, a miner for the
was divided into fiefs and a vassal was in chargemining industry produces a great deal of wealth
of his parcel of land. Serfs were the peasantscompared to what he is paid. A miner makes, on
who labored for the wealth of their vassal. A serfaverage, makes $400,000 for his employer, but
was not allowed to leave his land without properhe is paid only $10,000 per year. In this case, the
permission to do so. Feudalism developed fromworker receives 2.5% of the wealth in which he
post-Roman estates filled with many slaves.produces. If a farmer ploughed the field of 200
Today, though, most liberal historians will refer tocrops, the Capitalist would turn around and give
serfs as "just a differnt type of slave," and this ishim 5 of them. How is it that the Capitalist can do
quite true.However, the bondage of Feudalismthis? Simple. Because he owns the farm, he owns
could not last forever. A new way of working andthe tractor, he owns the tools, he owns the land.
producing came into effect. And it came, as weAnd by what right can this be done? By what
have today, the industrial society. Variousdoctrine? The right to property.Thus, what do we
revolutions of the European nations took place,find? We find two great, incontrovertible facts: (1)
even as late as the middle 1800's (such as theThe laborers, the workers, are the producers of
case of Germany). Eventually, Feudalism waswealth. Without them, there would be no food,
eliminated, the serf was liberated, and freedomthere would be no iron ore, there would be no
reigned. The crystaline dove of prosperity was ontools. Without them, there would not be the
the land, and there was never again to be a cryfarms to grow the food, the mines to mine the
of brutality... or, at least, that is the picture paintedore, and the factories to produce the tools. They
by many historians.The rights of slaves in theare the sole creators of wealth. (2) The condition
Roman Empire was simple: they had none. Well,of those who create all the wealth is in such a
there were some laws dictating action to be donehorrid state. They are paid a subsistence wage,
to slaves, certain protection measures, butremarkably below what they deserve to be paid.
beyond that, they were as much slaves asIn "Demands of the Communist Manifesto," Marx
Africans were for centuries in America. The rightswrote that one of the first conditions of a just
of serfs in the Feudal times were much evolvedgovernment is this: that child labor is immediately
from that of slavery. A serf worked, and a greateradicated, and that an education is provided for
deal of his produce went to his master. A serfthem.More simply put... Those who produce
was not allowed to leave his land without consent.everything are given almost nothing. This is not
Finally, we have Capitalism, or Free Enterprise, thejustice. Capitalism has nearly reproduced
system where a worker can leave his landFeudalism, in such a manner that Feudalism nearly
whenever he wants. But, is it real freedom, or isreproduced slavery. No humane heart can look at
it just the manifestation of slavery in anotherthese children, growing deformed because they
form?The Brutal Nature of CapitalismIn Feudalism,work for their food, and say, "Ah, liberty! What a
there were various classes, but two distinct ones:great godsend we have before us!" No kind
nobility and serfdom. The nobles did no manualperson can see the mass of workers, without
labor yet they lavished in the wealth produced byhope, without heart, without meaning, working
peasants. In Capitalism, we see again the rise ofonly that they may feed themselves and pay
two distinct classes: the Bourgeoise and thetheir rent. And where does their money go when
Proletariat. The Bourgoise are the capital-owningthey buy food or when they pay their rent? It
class, those who own the means of production.goes directly back into the pockets of those who
They own the farms, the banks, the factories.exploited them. Perpetual poverty. I detest
The Proletariat, however, own nothing. They haveCapitalism because of its inherent brutality. I am
no farm land. They have no factories. They donot alone.In his "The Capitalist System," Bakunin
not even have food for themselves. In essense,wrote, "Thus the worker's liberty, so much
slavery is entirely recreated. Because, while aexalted by the economists, jurists, and bourgeois
worker can refuse one job or move from hisrepublicans, is only a theoretical freedom, lacking
land, he is entirely dependent upon the Bourgeoiseany means for its possible realization, and
class for providing him with his subsistence.Peterconsequently it is only a fictitious liberty, an utter
Kropotkin once wrote of the workers, "We arefalsehood. The truth is that the whole life of the
perfectly aware that they often work for evenworker is simply a continuous and dismaying
less, but we know also that they do it entirelysuccession of terms of serfdom -voluntary from
because, thanks to to our splendid socialthe juridical point of view but compulsory in the
organization, they would die of hunger withouteconomic sense - broken up by momentarily brief
these ridiculous wages." ["The Wage System," byinterludes of freedom accompanied by starvation;
Peter Kropotkin.] Mikhail Bakunin once wrote,in other words, it is real slavery." Thomas Paine
"Suppose I am your worker and you are myargued against Capitalism, writing, "It is not charity
employer. If I offer my labor at the lowest price,but a right, not bounty but justice, that I am
if I consent to have you live off my labor, it ispleading for. The present state of civilization is as
certainly not because of devotion or brotherlyodious as it is unjust. It is absolutely the opposite
love for you. And no bourgeois economist wouldof what it should be, and it is necessary that a
dare to say that it was, however idyllic and naiverevolution should be made in it. The contrast of
their reasoning becomes when they begin toaffluence and wretchedness continually meeting
speak about reciprocal affections and mutualand offending the eye, is like dead and living
relations which should exist between employersbodies chained together." ["Agrarian Justice," by
and employees. No, I do it because my family andThomas Paine.] In the same work, he wrote, "The
I would starve to death if I did not work for anstate of civilization that has prevailed throughout
employer. Thus I am forced to sell you my laborEurope, is as unjust in its principle, as it is horrid in
at the lowest possible price, and I am forced toits effects; and it is the consciousness of this, and
do it by the threat of hunger." ["The Capitalistthe apprehension that such a state cannot
System," by Mikhail Bakunin.] In that samecontinue when once investigation begins in any
document, he also wrote, "The worker is in thecountry, that makes the possessors of property
position of a serf because this terrible threat ofdread every idea of a revolution." As Henry Salt
starvation which daily hangs over his head andonce wrote, "Our capitalists persist to the bitter
over his family, will force him to accept anyend in the fatuous assertion that to live idly on
conditions imposed by the gainful calculations ofthe labour of others is not the same thing as to
the capitalist, the industrialist, the employer."steal." ["Thou Shalt Not Steal," by Henry Stephens
Robert Green Ingersoll once wrote, "The workingShakespeare Salt, Justice, March 14, 1885.]What is
people should be protected by law; if they areit that we have before us? Great injustice,
not, the capitalists will require just as many hoursbrutality, cruelty, misery, and vice. I believe that
as human nature can bear." ["Eight Hours Mustevery worker should be paid the wealth they
Come," by Robert Green Ingersoll.]Workers haveproduce. I believe that those who own capital
no property, so they cannot bargain. They cannotshould be relinquished of their rights to the means
demand higher wages, for while they do, theirof production. Did Harriet Tubman ever leave
children are shouting for bread that does notmoney behind, to compensate the slave-owner?
exist. That is the result of Capitalism. A CapitalistCertainly not! The idea of it is an absurdity. So,
philosopher may speak of "freedom" or "liberty" allthen, too, the Capitalist class should have its right
he wants. But when it comes down to it, it's thto the means of production released. Because, as
politics of starving. It is perpetual poverty. Athey own the means of production, as they own
person can argue all they want, "If the job isthe farms, they are then granted the economic
unfair, they can quit and find another one." But asright of exploitation, which is opposed ot all good
they are thrown back into the job market, theycreeds. That is the first step to revolution. A law
will rarely be able to find another boss willing toought to be made... stating that no person may
pay more.What is it that makes this sickening,become wealthy from the labor of another.
revolting, and cruel, to the sight of every humaneEveryone should have an equal obligation to work.
person? It is that the workers are responsible forUpon this commencement, I believe the idea of
producing the wealth! Adam Smith wrote, "It wasWelfare ought to also be abolished, or at least
not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all theextremely minimalized. Once workers are being
wealth of the world was originally purchased."paid what they produce, no person will ever need
["Wealth of Nations", by Adam Smith, Book 1,a handout. Imagine, for instance, if instead of
Chapter 5.] Ingersoll wrote, "The great body of2.5%, a person was paid closer to 90% or 95%.
the people make all the money; do all the work.Imagine every wage multiplied by forty. What
They plow the land, cut down the forests; theyyou have, then, is that corporate profits, instead
produce everything that is produced. Then whoof going to the idle, go to the industrious. That is
shall say what shall be done with what is producedjustice. Since working one hour will be able to get
except the producer?" ["Centennial Oration," bysomeone enough subsistence for days, I imagine
Ingersoll.] In another work, he wrote, "All mycriminal activity will be greatly reduced. Why would
sympathies are on the side of those who toil -- ofa robber ever decide to steal a TeeVee from
those who produce the real wealth of the worldsomeone's home, when working one hour would
-- of those who carry the burdens of mankind."be enough to produce one or two television sets?
["Eight Hours Must Come," by Ingersoll.] FriedrichInstead of having our Capitalists decide for us
Engels wrote, "Labour is the source of all wealth,what industries are best, people would
the political economists assert. And it really is theDemocratically decide for themselves what they
source..." ["Part Played by Labour in Transitionwant. By voting together, every person will have
From Ape to Man," by Engels, 1876.]The fact thata say in the matter of decision-making. So, then,
Capitalism incurs brutality is not at all at question.a new business will be erected, or an old one
Robert Owen, an Industrialist and Utopian Socialistdestroyed, by the vote of the people. The
of the early 1800's, wrote that in one particularindustries of food, of housing, of luxuries, will all be
incident, a factory owner had employed childrendetermined by the people. In this regard, we will
ages 6, 7, and 8. They worked for thirteen hoursnot have the egregious abuse of the consumer
a day. Their work was so grueling and difficult forthat we have today under Capitalism. A person
such tender bodies, a great deal of them becamewill never go into a tourist shop, and find a molded
permanently deformed. ["A New View ofpiece of pottery on sale for $40 (though it cost
Society," by Robert Owen, essay 2.] Thomas$2 to make), upon which any rational person
Malthus also noted the same, "Boys that youwould respond, "We made this, while we have
would guess to be fourteen or fifteen are, uponstarving people in the corners of the globe?"That
inquiry, frequently found to be eighteen oris Communism, and that is what I believe in. Life,
nineteen." ["An Essay on the Principle ofPunkerslutPunkerslut (or Andy Carloff) has been
Population," by Thomas Malthus.] The fact thatwriting essays and poetry on social issues which
Capitalists have been forcing workers to workhave caught his attention for several years. His
under harsh conditions is not in question bywebsite provides a complete list of all of these
anyone known to the facts. To quote Robertwritings. His life experience includes homelessness,
Green Ingersoll, "We have seen here in Americasquating in New Orleans and LA, dropping out of
street-car drivers working sixteen and seventeenhigh school, getting expelled from college for
hours a day. It was necessary to have a strike in"subversive activities," and a myriad of other
order to get to fourteen, another strike to get torevolutionary actions.
twelve, and nobody could blame them for keeping