Skip to main content

How Capitalism Transfers Blame to Workers

Currently, there is a visible conflict between workers and employers that exemplifies everything that is wrong with the capitalist view of human nature and the tendency of all problems caused by capitalism to be blamed on the working class. One of the best and most tangible aspects of America's COVID response to American workers has been the increase in unemployment insurance. This is obviously a good thing, especially because being paid minimum wage is not worth risking your life to work during a pandemic. Now, however, many are trying to claim that it is a problem, because unemployment benefits have risen higher than current wages and benefits at many restaurants and similar businesses. The issue presented is that people would rather sit at home and collect unemployment instead of working, and the culprit presented is, of course, the greedy working class who wants nothing more than to be paid for doing nothing. 

This current situation shows so much about what is wrong with the capitalist mindset and how capitalism treats workers. While the capitalist's desire to keep wages low and make more money is portrayed as being "good business", the worker's desire to survive is viewed as selfish and socially irresponsible. Republican lawmakers have tried to end the unemployment benefits, saying that they are causing people to not work, thus hurting the economy. This entire view is dehumanizing and treats workers and their labor exactly how capitalism demands: as commodities. Not as human beings who need to be fairly compensated and allowed to live comfortable lives, but as tools for profit creation. Rather than businesses raising their wages to allow workers to live in safety and comfort, they shame them for making the decision that is best for their wellbeing. 

Just recently, Biden's Press Secretary, Jen Psaki, said that "Workers are not permitted to refuse suitable work and continue to receive benefits." Now, what constitutes suitable work? In my view, a job that costs less than unemployment cannot possibly be called suitable. A job in which you are overworked and put at risk and not being properly compensated is not "suitable". The expectation is for the worker to forego benefits and take less than they are worth, rather than for the business to pay for the work that it desires.

Businesses aren't expected to pay people what their labor is worth.

Workers are expected to work for anyone who will pay them anything.

This is obviously a problem caused by capitalism. As profit is the driving force of the entire system, business owners are incentivized to decrease costs any way that they can. Profit, as Marx showed, comes from the capitalist paying workers less than their labor created. This is the fundamental nature of what capitalism is and how it works. There is no reason for workers to be treated like human beings. There is no reason for them to be paid justly. There is absolutely no moral compass at all built into the system. All that matters is profit, and whatever yields the most profit is whatever must be done. 

As this is a problem with capitalism, it is obviously not the fault of the workers. However, this, like every single problem under capitalism, is blamed on the working class. Rather than admitting that the entire system is predicated on exploitation, the ruling class must instead put blame on individual actors. It's the fault of "a few businessmen". It's because "people just don't want to work". This happens with every single issue. Is climate change the fault of the giant companies that use fossil fuels and dump plastic into the ocean? No, it's because people have cars. Is poverty the fault of the capitalist system? Of course not, people just don't work hard enough. Capitalism is obviously a meritocracy, so, well, you just must not deserve to live comfortably. This is how capitalism functions. This is not a flaw in the system, this is the system. For these problems to go away, we need more than short-term reforms (although those can be helpful), we need the abolition of the capitalist system and order.

This is also very revealing about the capitalist concept of what "human nature" is. A common (and ridiculous) anti-Communist argument is the "human nature" argument. "Communism looks good in theory, but people are just too greedy so no it couldn't happen actually read Animal Farm", or something of the sort. The idea is that people are just selfish and greedy and only care about themselves, not a collective. While, obviously, selfishness is a part of human nature, it is nonsense to claim that that's the main thing. Humanity has always desired to live in groups, to survive as a whole, to help out others. This is also human nature. In the words of Andrew Collier, "To look at people in capitalist society and conclude that human nature is egoism, is like looking at people in a factory where pollution is destroying their lungs and saying that it is human nature to cough." 

Now, what does this have to do with this particular issue? Well, part of the "human nature" argument is that people wouldn't work if they didn't have to in order to survive. Now, obviously, there are some jobs that nobody would do if they didn't have to, but the premise of this argument is completely flawed. People have always worked, and there are motives beyond those of profit. People want to contribute to society, people want to feel useful, people want to grow and prosper. What people don't want to do is give up good benefits so that they can work for less money during a pandemic. This situation doesn't show workers being too greedy and lazy to work, it shows business owners being too greedy to pay them what they are worth.

Capitalism creates problems and then blames them on the working class. This is always what it has done, and what it will continue to do if it is allowed to.

Don't be convinced by any of the lies that are being told. Businesses are not closed because "nobody wants to work", but because of the greed of the capitalist class.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why "Defund the Police" Isn't a Bad Slogan

Recently, high-profile Democrats have come out against the slogan of "Defund the Police". Obama recently said that it's a bad slogan because it caused the Democrats to lose support and it's "divisive". I've been seeing a lot of Democrats complaining that the slogan is somehow "unclear" or could easily be misconstrued. I've seen other slogans be floated, most commonly "Reform the Police". The idea is that a slogan like that is more honest, more easily attainable, and less divisive. However, the criticisms from prominent liberals aren't backed by anything of value.  First off, Obama doesn't like "Defund the Police", not because he's worried about it being divisive, but because he is against the idea. Barack Obama, and the Democrats as a whole, are pro-police. They are pro-cop and they are pro giving the cops more money. Biden even ran on increasing  police budgets, showing that it isn't an issue of messagin...

Book Review: How to Be an Antiracist by Ibram X Kendi

Over the past few months, I've been trying to read more, as staying inside due to the pandemic hasn't exactly been filled with fun ways to fill time. Due to the recent protests in the US in response to the tragic murder of George Floyd and the history of violent oppression and white supremacy, I've specifically been trying to read more books on race and politics by black authors. I have been reading more political writing as of recently, and I thought that it was important to include more black perspectives. I had just completed the far-less mainstream and well-known writing Anarchism and The Black Revolution  by Lorenzo Kom'boa Ervin, which I enjoyed, and I thought I should read something more contemporary and less politically extreme. Therefore, I decided to read Ibram X Kendi's 2019 book, How to Be an Antiracist . The book is made up of 18 chapters, and nearly every chapter is dedicated to a specific kind of racism and antiracism. The book goes through topics lik...

Trump's Transgender Discrimination

Yesterday, on Friday, June 12, the Trump administration finalized a rule that rolls back Obama's nondiscrimination policies in the Affordable Care Act. Basically, the Affordable Care Act says that you can't refuse to give someone healthcare based on a variety of factors, like age, race, or sex. In 2016, the Obama administration had that word "sex" defined to include gender identity as well as biological sex. This particular point is the part that Trump had issues with. Now, the Trump administration defines "sex" as referring solely to biological sex, and they do not provide any further protections regarding gender. Therefore, in changing the legal definition and understanding of that one word, they are essentially making it legal to discriminate against transgender people. The Human Rights Campaign estimates that there are about 700,000 transgender people living in the United States. That's nearly a million people who now, based on how the Trump administ...

Why "What About Black on Black Crime" is a Bad Argument

With the current protests and the resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement, there is a common counterargument used by detractors of the movement: "what about black on black crime?" This is commonly brought up when people mention black people being murdered by police. The argument, is, essentially, that if those who support the Black Lives Matter movement actually cared about black lives, there would be protests for every black person killed by another black person. This is, of course, a particularly bad argument that is pretty irrelevant to the conversation, but I felt the need to write this post to go through all of the problems with this argument. So, here is a list of reasons why "what about black on black crime" is a bad argument. 1. Black on Black Crime is Not Racially Motivated This is the first reason that I'm going through because it's the most obvious reason that automatically shows that this argument holds no water. When protests erupt after p...

Why Political Polarization Isn't the Problem People Say It Is

Every election we hear that America is growing more and more polarized politically and that this is a huge problem dividing the American people. "People used to be able to agree." "Even if you disagreed with each other, you were still Americans." According to these people, now American political polarization has gotten so bad that nobody can agree on anything, and the solution proposed is bipartisanship and moderate centrism that makes everyone gets along. Unity is the most important thing. Now, part of the claim is true. In some sense, America is  more politically polarized. But this polarization isn't something that is simultaneously happening at both ends, with Democrats moving drastically left and Republicans drastically right, it's something that is happening at only one end. The Republican party and Republican voters have been moving further to the right, while Democrats have mostly stayed exactly the same, save a few members of government that the est...

Why Bernie and AOC are not Socialists

This is probably pointless to write, as very few people will read it and the majority of those who will will already know this, but it still feels important to do, as the level of misunderstanding surrounding socialism in American political discourse is just insane. Politicians like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have popularized the term and increased support for broadly progressive policies, but they have also helped to introduce many moderates and progressives to a nonsensical view of socialism and a lack of understanding of what it is. Despite the fact that members of this progressive wing are easily the best figures in American politics, they are not socialist, and it is important to understand what socialism is and why it should be supported. A very basic definition of socialism is a system in which the means of production are owned collectively, rather than individually. Under capitalism, capitalists own the means of production (factories, land, etc.) and use the la...

Marx's Birthday

Today is Karl Marx's 203rd birthday, and although Marx died in 1883 at the age of 64, his ideas are still important today and have played a large role in what I believe about politics, economics, and society. I am a socialist and a Communist because of the work and theory that was done by Karl Marx and subsequent interpretations and implementations of his work. On this day, 203 years from when he was born, I have decided to list some of Marx's works that I think are must-reads or are at least important to learn about and understand, and to provide some places to learn about Marxist ideas online. Happy birthday, Marx! Wage-Labour and Capital I consider Wage-Labour and Capital to absolutely be a must-read in Communist theory. This is a fairly short work, and it outlines components of capitalism, namely, as the title suggests, how wage labor works. It can be pretty didactic at times, as Marx tends to get, but it is important in understanding how labor is valued under capitalism a...

Show Review: Netflix's The Politician is Absolutely Terrible

The second season of The Politician came out on Netflix recently, and I watched it, even though I hated the first season, because I had nothing else to watch. Unsurprisingly, I hated this season too, and it was possibly one of the worst things I've had the misfortune of watching. One reason I hated the first season was the overdramatization of a high school student council race , which I assure you, as a high schooler, nobody cares about, so at least this season had higher stakes, as it was a New York State Senate race. Another reason I hated the first season was the fact that there was a Haitian character, played by a Ghanaian, who sounded nothing like a Haitian (although he did a West African accent), was named Pierre Toussaint, and was introduced to us in the middle of what plays as an AIDS joke (I assume anyone reading this knows I live in Haiti, and I'm sure non-Haitians won't even notice how tone-deaf this character is). This will only make sense if you have watched s...

Songs that Would Be Better National Anthems Than the Star-Spangled Banner

The Star-Spangled Banner is a bad national anthem. It sucks. Every time I hear it I shudder. It's a bad song. You want me to stand and put a hand over my heart for a bad song? I think not. The Haitian national anthem is a billion times better, and there's a reason why I sing along to it and not to the American one. It isn't necessarily because of a difference in patriotic feeling, it's because the American one is objectively worse. We can change that. Here is a list of songs that we could replace the American National Anthem with. Party Rock Anthem - LMFAO Come on, the word "anthem" is literally in the name. My patriotism would increase greatly if every football game started with Redfoo telling me to have a good time. Make this the national anthem and I will fly an American flag and say "God bless America" every day. Party Rock Anthem - Kidzbop Version Same as the last entry, but for the kiddos out there who don't want to hear about butts in thei...