Capital vs Labor

[Nehru]

Comrades,

Capitalists compete with each other, just as workers compete with each other. For instance, a capitalist may see a fellow capitalist, rather than a worker, as a greater threat, since he's more likely to be destroyed by his rival than by a bunch of workers.

In the same way, a worker may see a fellow worker, rather than his boss, as a threat to his promotion, raise, job prospects, whatever. In other words, even though in Marxian analysis, there's a conflict between labor and capital, in real life it seems like capital vs capital (and labor vs labor) is a more immediate problem than capital vs labor.

Regards,

[Dogs On Acid]

Once the Bourgeoisie dominates the Petite-Bourgeoisie it turns them into workers. They cannot survive with such competition.

Capital vs. Capital soon turns into Capital vs. Labor.

[Nehru]

Once the Bourgeoisie dominates the Petite-Bourgeoisie it turns them into workers. They cannot survive with such competition.

Capital vs. Capital soon turns into Capital vs. Labor.

What I mean to say is that since capitalists are in a constant state of competition, they're not a homogenous entity actively conspiring against the workers. Doesn't mean workers aren't getting a raw deal. They are. But that's incidental, not a conspiracy by the capitalist class (since it's not homogenous enough to conspire in such a manner).

[Dogs On Acid]

What I mean to say is that since capitalists are in a constant state of competition, they're not a homogenous entity actively conspiring against the workers. Doesn't mean workers aren't getting a raw deal. They are. But that's incidental, not a conspiracy by the capitalist class (since it's not homogenous enough to conspire in such a manner).

Capital are like dogs. They will be real kind to each-other when not in either one's territory (cartels, mutual aid for market-expansion, ambiguous contracts), but when one Capitalist's business invades the Market of another, they turn rabid for power.

All of this while at the same time exploiting the physical abilities of other Human Beings.

It's a sick system.

[Hit The North]

What I mean to say is that since capitalists are in a constant state of competition, they're not a homogenous entity actively conspiring against the workers. Doesn't mean workers aren't getting a raw deal. They are. But that's incidental, not a conspiracy by the capitalist class (since it's not homogenous enough to conspire in such a manner).

Marx describes the bourgeoisie as being like a band of warring brothers, fully aware of the competition between capitalist that drives the system on. At the same time they are like brothers in that they share a common class interest in opposition to other classes, particularly the proletariat. The bourgeoisie has a common interest in maintaining and deepening the exploitation of the proletariat because that is how they make profit.

Marx was also fully aware that the proletariat can often be forced into opposition amongst itself, due to the economic compulsion of competition for jobs and other resources that may be held in scarcity due to the exploited state of the proletariat. At the same time, Marxism argues that the proletariat has a common interest in overthrowing the relations of production which keep all proletarians in a state of dependence on capital.

It is important to recognise that for Marxists it is the reproduction of the capitalist mode of production which keeps the workers down, not the conspiracies of the bourgeoisie. Although conspiracies between elites may often take place, these are more the result of the social relations of production rather than the cause.

It is also important to recognise that the "raw deal" the workers get is not merely "incidental" but is the essential outcome of the capitalist mode of production. Only the overthrow of this mode of production can secure the freedom of the proletariat and, with it, humanity.