:States are the resultant response to a violent, avaricious world. They are designed, it is true, to protect those who amass wealth by drawing a percentage of that wealth. They are, in effect, nothing more than a legitimized protection racket. And, in a world full of anarchists and socialists, whose main arguments seems to be that property itself is theft, therefore theft and violence (in the form of terrorism and revolution) is perfectly reasonable, the state is more popular than ever.
Goodness, aside from the Hobbesianesque portrayal of the world, I didn't realize it was so "full of anarchists and socialists". Which channel do you watch, I gotta subscribe.
: Class, however, is not the product of capitalism, except in the sense that the act of producing, being a talent that varies in quality for each individual, naturally introduces inequality of success.
Is it then "inequality of success" that defines class structure? I'm sorry, this is far too vague. Is there some objective criteria for "success"? Is a "successful" millwright placed in some strata above his run of the mill boss? Is a union nothing more than a social club? Are the aims of the union - after all being fundamentally...at the bottom...after all is said and done - the Same as "management?
Indeed, socialism cannot abolish 'class' except through the most draconian methods; in this case, of course, it is declared something other than socialism, well after the fact.
Sadly there certainly have been cases of this. It is not a necessity. I would not call the anarcho-syndacalist experiment in Spain draconian, though their suppression certainly was. In Kerela, a communist state, attempts to eradicate the caste system have certainly not been draconian. Indeed, to once again attempt to hammer home a point, to the degree that socialism incorporates totalitarian structures, to that degree is it NOT socialism.
Knowing full well that 'classes' naturally form amongst people, and cleverly using tribalism and group loyalties to foment envy and dissent
amongst people, the academic socialist can make quite a comfortable living for himself.
Sounds like a conspiracy to me. Just like those damned abolitionists... stirring up trouble with those otherwise happy and contented slaves.
Thus, if I strive to accumulate some surplus for myself, I will be assailed not only by the state, but by greedy socialists as well. Between the two, I would think the state provides the best deal, so long as it is not particularly socialist, i.e. that their protection of my property is something more than an empty sham. No,capitalists would be loath to abolish the state. One might well replace theterm 'capitalists' with 'the sane' or 'the law abiding'. One might claim that the shotgun I keep in my house is nothing more than a tool for murder; I would counter that, with so many of the "People's Action Committee" similarly armed, and with their seeming commitment to molest me in my own home, I feel compelled to invest in the maintenance and upkeep of this device. So also, I find the state a most useful means
of avoiding the worst socialist claims on my labor, my efforts, my property, etc., and am less than sympathetic to the "glorious revolutionaries" when the Pinkertons are sent out yet again to break up another lawless riot. The support that the Left showed for the "Los Angeles rebellion" pretty much sums up what I consider the truth behind
anarchistic and socialist policy. In return, I applaud the United States National Guard for embodying my own response.
Yeah…this is what Hobbes wanted as well. The only thing he required "to overawe every individual" [and so provide a social obligation] was a king. Ahh the good old days of the monarchy eh! When people knew their place under the enlightened reign of good king Cruel.
Anyway we're well past all that now. Nation States are nearly irrelevant as multinational corporations exert their global reach into every conceivable market. Kings or troublesome democracies, it's all the same to them. Just sign on the dotted line.......................
::And now, with the gracious permission of my "Big Brothers", this infant returns to his 'crib'.
Be sure you check under it for socialists first;)