Is the bourgeiosie really organised or is capitalism a living entity?

[Dr Mindbender]

I don't know if this has been discussed or not, but i'd like to share with you this little ephiphany i had during a moment of clarity during my lunch break today.

The consensus i seem to get from most leftist circles is that the working class must organise, not least because it is imperative to revolution but also to counter the fact that the beourgiose, or at least we tell ourselves this is organising in a similar, consciencious fashion.

But how can this be? If you subscribe to the philosophy of Ayn Rand, as i'm sure a vast proportion of students of lassaiz faire thought and beourgiose do, then this is completely contrary to the idea of self preservation or freedom without concept of loyalty to others.

So either the beourgiose are even more contemptuous liars than we thought (meeting up in shady boardrooms for Illuminati type conferences where they plan the ruling of the Earth) or could it be that the very capitalist system itself, is actually a living, conscious, self calculating entity comprised of the individual efforts of the beourgiose and to a lesser extent their middle class foot soldiers?

[Hyacinth]

But how can this be? If you subscribe to the philosophy of Ayn Rand, as i'm sure a vast proportion of students of lassaiz faire thought and beourgiose do, then this is completely contrary to the idea of self preservation or freedom without concept of loyalty to others.
I think you overestimate the degree to which Rand and her ilk are taken seriously by real capitalists. Most objectivists (sic) and libertarians tend to consists of the petty-bourgeoisie. Any real capitalist, for instance, isn’t opposed to government intervention when it is in their interest. A real capitalist would probably be wetting themselves at the idea of a government granted monopoly. Libertarianism and objectivism aren’t and don’t represent the ideas of the ruling class.

[trivas7]

The consensus i seem to get from most leftist circles is that the working class must organise, not least because it is imperative to revolution but also to counter the fact that the beourgiose, or at least we tell ourselves this is organising in a similar, consciencious fashion.

So either the beourgiose are even more contemptuous liars than we thought (meeting up in shady boardrooms for Illuminati type conferences where they plan the ruling of the Earth) or could it be that the very capitalist system itself, is actually a living, conscious, self calculating entity comprised of the individual efforts of the beourgiose and to a lesser extent their middle class foot soldiers?
OTC, selfish individualism, me-first attitude, competition and keeping score are the values that Objectivists in particular and the ruling class hold dear. Shifting alliances are stock-in-trade for any good capitalist's bottom line. What you are perhaps alluding to is the sweeting-sounding brotherhood-of-man-under-one-God religious ideology that often accompanies this behaviour. It is not for nothing that Bill Gates, like many of the rapacious greedy before him, will in his last days attempt to give away his filthy lucre to charitable causes in that oh so normal twist of karmic recompense.

Capitalists are many things, the Borg is not one of them.

[Dr Mindbender]

so back to the question at hand, is there a consciencious, organised effort on the part of the international beourgiose to undermine the communist argument or individually, are they merely constitutents of a much larger consciousness?

[Hyacinth]

To answer your original question: I’m sure there are conscious efforts on the part of the bourgeoisie to undermine and marginalize potentially dangerous (to them) political movements. Imperialism is certainly conscious, even if not on the part of the entire bourgeoisie (after all, the bourgeoisie aren’t monolithic, what might be in the interests of some isn’t necessarily in the interests of others). That having been said, the bourgeoisie, as a class, do seem capable of cooperation when it comes to issues that they all have a vested interest in (e.g. cracking down on unions, weakening worker’s rights, lowering taxes for themselves, etc.). Actions like this are conscious.

On the other hand certain things are systemic. For example, the lack of alternate viewpoints in the mainstream media, and the mainstream media’s editorial policy, I doubt has to do with a conscious decision on the part of the bourgeoisie to marginalize leftist viewpoints. Rather, it is more likely to be a consequence of the fact that no one with considerable capital has any interest in investing in a media outlet that present communist ideas.

But none of this is a product of capitalism as a “living, conscious, self-calculating entity”. What Marx said of history is applicable here with respect to capitalism as an economy system: capitalism “is not like some individual person, which uses [the bourgeoisie] to achieve its ends... [it] is nothing but the actions of the bourgeoisie in pursuit of their ends.”

[Zurdito]

the state = the collective decision making body of the bourgeoise. each country has a united business lobby like the CBI in the UK which lobby's for business friendly politics. yes, of course they are organised, even when they do compete, they share a common need to attack workers rights and push the pentration of all aspects of life by capital as far as possible.

[Hit The North]

This is an interesting subject: how important to the reproduction of the capitalist system is the conscious activity of the bourgeoisie, organised as a class?

They certainly organise their own reproduction as a class through the education system and through culture.

Nevertheless, I think it's really a theory question so I'm gonna move it there.

[Dean]

I don't know if this has been discussed or not, but i'd like to share with you this little ephiphany i had during a moment of clarity during my lunch break today.

The consensus i seem to get from most leftist circles is that the working class must organise, not least because it is imperative to revolution but also to counter the fact that the beourgiose, or at least we tell ourselves this is organising in a similar, consciencious fashion.

But how can this be? If you subscribe to the philosophy of Ayn Rand, as i'm sure a vast proportion of students of lassaiz faire thought and beourgiose do, then this is completely contrary to the idea of self preservation or freedom without concept of loyalty to others.

So either the beourgiose are even more contemptuous liars than we thought (meeting up in shady boardrooms for Illuminati type conferences where they plan the ruling of the Earth) or could it be that the very capitalist system itself, is actually a living, conscious, self calculating entity comprised of the individual efforts of the beourgiose and to a lesser extent their middle class foot soldiers?

An interesting question, but like many such problems, the answer lies in between the two poles.

For starters, there is a controllign elite who know damn well that they control society. These are high-up board members on major corporations like Union Carbide, Altria and EXxon. Then there are the mindless corporate officers and technocrats who busy themselves with numbers and the moving around of capital and economic activity within their own organizations. Then there are the strata of managers, then the footsoldiers... it's all very fluid.

But it can be said quite distinctly that there is a rulign elite who know it, and there are the businessmen who work with numbers that control lives. It gets murky, but the bourgeoisie has a mind which is both conscious and unconscious.

[Mather]

No system, be it capitalism, socialism or anarchism/communism is a "living entity".

Anything outside of organic life is not alive.

Capitalism, as a system of social organisation, is not sentient.



If you subscribe to the philosophy of Ayn Rand, as i'm sure a vast proportion of students of lassaiz faire thought and beourgiose do, then this is completely contrary to the idea of self preservation or freedom without concept of loyalty to others.


The likes of Ayn Rand, Murray Rothbard and Mises and their ultra-'libertarian' ideology, are but on the fringes of established capitalist/bourgeois ruling class ideology and thinking.

This is probably most true of Ayn Rand of all, as those who support her ideas are in the main, teenagers and a few university students from wealthy families who have a limited exposure to the real world and the workings of the capitalist system, hence their incoherent and unrealitic views that hardly ever stand up to intellectual scrutiny.

Many people have come to refer to Ayn Rand's followers as the "Rand cult", on the basis that groups set up to promote her works and writings and her followers tend to worship her in the manner of cult members to their cult leader.

Also Ayn Rand mainly expressed her 'ideology' in the form of fiction novels such as Anthem, Atlas Shrugged and Fountainhead. On a side note her books are rather dull and very repetitive, what would take most writers to express in fifty pages she does it with three hundred.

But most key policy makers, decision makers and other key officials within any capitalist/bourgeois ruling class do not take Ayn Rand that seriously.



So either the beourgiose are even more contemptuous liars than we thought


That we all know and that is something history has proven.

It is not that strange for the bourgeois ruling class to promote an ideology and fail to live by it themselves.

After all, bourgeois ideology is simply one mechanism (out of many) to control the working and oppressed classes and a method of social control, as well as justifying the injust concept of a small yet powerful parasitic class ruling over the rest of society.



could it be that the very capitalist system itself, is actually a living, conscious, self calculating entity comprised of the individual efforts of the beourgiose and to a lesser extent their middle class foot soldiers?


This bit makes no sense.

If the capitalist system were a living entity, then it would not act and evolve based on the combined individual efforts of the ruling class and/or the middle classes. There is no central 'brain' to the capitalist system, it is a lot more complex than that, as you would expect from any human society.