The Capitalist is Useless.
Long ago, the bourgeoisie were useful. Now they're parasites.
Though our society regards the wealthy capitalist as the most moral and successful of its constituents, these people serve no material purpose at this point in human development. During the more primitive stages of humanity, monarchy was a necessity. But as we now realize, our species has evolved past the infantile need for kings and queens in favor of more democratic forms of governance. Like a child growing into adulthood, we no longer need all-powerful babysitters decreeing from their thrones.
The same is true for the capitalist. While some claim the capitalist is still necessary, inspection of their daily purpose shows they are an obsolete component of the production process: a parasite that takes unearned value from the working class while providing little in return.
What Does the Capitalist Do?
The capitalist has one job. They own capital, which is the things we use to make other things. Capital includes money, companies, factories, stores, machines, tools, and other derivatives of these, such as stock, debt, and intellectual property. In America’s capitalist system, goods and services are produced when capitalists allow others to use these things. An inventor pitches her creation to the capitalist and asks for financial backing to start mass-producing her new medical device, which will save lives on the operation table. Or, a capitalist owns a warehouse that distributes online orders and hires workers to use their capital — forklifts, conveyor belts, delivery vans, etc. — to deliver packages to households. Using these tools, the workers create value for society, as measured by the total revenue they generate. Because our legal structure considers the warehouse and all its fittings as the capitalist’s “property,” the capitalist claims this value. The workers, who without there would be no revenue, receive only a fragment of their worth as a wage.
At one time in human history, the role of the capitalist was necessary. As nations transitioned from feudalism to capitalism, individual capital owners were needed to build factories, finance trade routes, and play “the money game” of trading and borrowing on credit to conjure value out of thin air. Their role helped humanity expand its ability to produce goods and services. Kings and emperors had no interest in doing so, and the peasantry was understandably focused on growing enough crops to survive through winter. Society needed someone to step in and think about the future. Motivated by profit, the capitalists did so. Karl Marx best articulates the historical necessity of the bourgeoisie (capitalist class) in Chapter 1 of The Communist Manifesto.
“The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has created more massive and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding generations together. Subjection of Nature’s forces to man, machinery, application of chemistry to industry and agriculture, steam-navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing of whole continents for cultivation, canalisation of rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground — what earlier century had even a presentiment that such productive forces slumbered in the lap of social labour?” — The Communist Manifesto, Chapter I. Bourgeois and Proletarians1
I share Marx’s analysis. The transition from feudalism to capitalism, which propelled invention and development was good and necessary. Since evolving it homo sapiens, humanity has progressed through various stages: hunter-gathering, feudalism, and capitalism, just to name a few. Trying to “skip” the capitalist stage would be a failure, just as if we went back in time and tried to convince a band of Paleolithics to “skip” feudalism and become wage laborers in a capitalist system. They would rightfully be baffled and ignore us, as there are no factories to work in and no markets to exchange their wages for food. The same is true of capitalism.
But just like feudalism, we no longer need capitalism. Working collectively, the public can easily take over their role of lending capital so that others may produce. In many cases, we already have, but the capitalists are needlessly included in the process so that they may profit. For example, take the iPhone, the invention often touted as the Holy Grail of American capitalism. At its core, the iPhone is four things:
A phone for calling, texting, and emailing;
A computer for browsing the internet;
A GPS for navigation; and
A touch screen to make it all accessible.
Apple has combined these tools in the iPhone, which they sell for profit. However, upon inspection, we see that Apple’s role in getting the iPhone into your hands is minimal and could easily be shriveled. Most of its components would not exist or work without public funding from the state. The modern internet is an outgrowth of ARPANET, a product financed by the Defense Department. The email was one of the first uses of this publicly-funded program. So was GPS,2 a government-maintained satellite system made available for private use.3 The touchscreen was invented by researchers working for the British government, and the modern adaptation was developed at the publicly-funded University of Kentucky.4 Text messaging was a publicly-funded creation, invented during a joint venture by the French and German governments.5 To be fair, the mobile phone was a private invention, but as it is quickly becoming a relic of the past, it’s not much for capital to hang its hat on.6 Even Siri, Apple’s voice-activated (and underwhelming) assistant, came from tax dollars. Similar dynamics appear in the most prominent “capitalist” inventions. Despite his libertarian claims, Elon Musk’s companies — Tesla, Solar City, and SpaceX — are built upon publicly-created technology and backed by government subsidies.7
libertarian (noun): someone who whines about having to pay taxes on income from government contracts. Also likely to have “unique” thoughts on age of consent laws.
So, if many of our modern luxuries are the product of public funding, what use are the capitalists? None. As the public has built the components of modern technology and allowed capitalists to modify or incorporate them for gargantuan profits, we should begin the process of cutting out the middlemen. It is time to discard the capitalist who extracts enormous value from taxpayers and workers, seldom lifts a finger or commits to labor, and expects to be glorified as a result. Kicking the bourgeoise won’t be feasible in one fell swoop, but we can begin the process. There’s no reason the American government can’t directly invest in smartphones, space exploration, or any other major industry directly. After all, SpaceX is using rocket technology developed by NASA. Yet taxpayers are expected to fund Musk’s wealth so that he can sell us variations of the engines we created seventy-five years ago. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know that’s bullshit.
As governments cannot be expected to plan or match every consumer need in the near future, I recognize the need for cooperative businesses: worker-owned companies that will fill the role current capitalist small businesses play in local economies. In these enterprises, everyone receives the value their labor creates, and no owner is collecting the value of work they did not do. When working in conjunction with government control of major industries (pharmaceuticals, energy, communications, weaponry, transportation, etc.), cooperatives are an available and proven way to match consumer needs without resorting to capitalist exploitation.
I’m not a socialist because I think capitalism is uniquely evil. Quite the opposite. I think it was necessary for humanity to use capitalism at specific times and places, just as dictatorial chieftains were necessary to organize hunting bands so that humanity didn’t starve. (And make no mistake: our species dying in its cradle was always a possibility.) But like primal warlords, humanity has outgrown the need for capitalists. As we did away with tribal rulers, emperors, kings, and queens, it is time for us to cast aside the capitalists and advance to a higher stage of society, one in which everyone receives the full value of their work.
This higher stage is socialism, which will eventually lead to an even superior mode of production: communism.
If you appreciated, enjoyed, or learned something from this article, please like (click the ❤️), send it to a curious friend, and subscribe. If you enjoy JoeWrote (even sometimes), please consider supporting me with a premium subscription. It’s cheap and well worth the price.
The role of capital in the 21st century is an in-depth subject that this article only scratched the surface of. If you’re curious to explore this topic further, here is more reading.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch01.htm
https://aerospace.org/article/brief-history-gps
https://odimpact.org/case-united-states-opening-gps-data-for-civilian-use.html
https://microtouch.com/the-evolution-of-touchscreen-technology/
https://www.messagedesk.com/blog/text-messaging-history-timeline-evolution
https://www.everydaysociologyblog.com/2024/04/the-changing-status-of-phone-calls.html
https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html
Interesting to think of capitalism as a stage we need to pass through. Thanks for sharing!
I've never considered the idea of capitalism being a stage of development we needed to have to grow into something better, it's interesting to look at it in this way. I feel like the competing philosophies behind free market economics contributed to making the current system what it is are just as much to blame as the system itself?