zhihu2024

zhihu2024

知乎分享

Why has capitalism not perished?

Author: The Crown of Tokamak

Because the existence of so-called "capitalism" is debatable, how can something that likely doesn't exist at all be said to perish?

The reality is that there is no universally accepted clear definition of "capitalism." If you ask four leftists what "capitalism" is, they can provide at least five different explanations, and these explanations often conflict with each other. Leftists may even fight over whose explanation is the most authoritative and correct.

No so-called "capitalist country" has ever claimed to practice "capitalism," nor has any ideological faction ever referred to itself as "capitalist."

The term "capitalism" is actually used by leftists as a blanket term for everything they disapprove of; it is a definition imposed on others rather than a reflection of the essence of those things. The differences between "capitalist countries" are often greater than the differences between humans and dogs. Their economic models are diverse, social structures are entirely different, policy directions are at odds, ideologies vary widely, and historical processes are unique to each.

In the mouths of leftists, the oil princes of the Middle East are capitalism, the high-tax, high-welfare systems of Northern Europe are capitalism, the clusters of small and medium enterprises in Japan are capitalism, the large trusts in the United States are capitalism, the controlled economy of South Korea is capitalism, the free trade in Singapore is capitalism, Germany's conservative financial model is capitalism, France's usurious banking syndicates are capitalism, Australia's dual economy of finance and mining is capitalism, Italy's design-led manufacturing is capitalism, India's small vendor communities are capitalism, and Southeast Asia's family business model is capitalism.

In short, everything can be capitalism; anything that doesn't suit their taste is capitalism.

Isn't this linguistic corruption?

Such a complex social existence cannot be summarized or defined by just one or two terms.

If you label all these things with the same tag and call it capitalism, then lamenting why capitalism hasn't perished yet is akin to cursing others to death every day.

Is this the best you can do?

The term "capitalism" was originally coined by British novelist William Makepeace Thackeray, who used it to describe and satirize a state of having control and ownership over a large amount of assets in his novels, rather than referring to a specific social system. In simpler terms, it is similar to the idea of "having a mine at home." When Thackeray first introduced the term "capitalism," the closest Chinese terms to his original meaning were actually "unfeeling wealth" and "toadyism."

Thackeray's works leaned towards critical realism, and he was a failed businessman who experienced the harsh realities of society, which made his satire sharp and incisive. This resonated with many who were dissatisfied with the social conditions of his time, leading to the term's spread as a way to express discontent with society. This practice was gradually accepted in European political circles, and thus the term "capitalism" began to generalize.

Initially, "capitalism" in European political circles specifically referred to an economic system where capital property is privately owned and labor is organized through employment relationships. Later, in the debates within European political circles, the term was infinitely extended and expanded, evolving from describing a mode of production to encompassing an entire economic system, then expanding from the description of an economic system to that of a political structure, and further from a political structure to a summary of social models, ultimately generalizing to encompass forms of civilization, even reaching the level of human flaws. The end result was that it became a catch-all term for everything.

Once leftists adopted this term, its applicability became uncontrollably rampant. Initially, leftists labeled all social realities they opposed as capitalism, then labeled all political viewpoints they disagreed with as capitalism, and later labeled all opponents as capitalism. Eventually, they labeled anyone who had reservations when supporting them as capitalism, and during internal purges, anyone deemed insufficiently aligned was also labeled capitalism. In the end, everyone except themselves was labeled capitalism, fighting in the heart of the enemy.

The famous Bolshevik theorist, early Soviet elder Bukharin, was designated by Stalin as a spy for capitalist countries, while Stalin himself was accused by Trotsky's followers of accumulating industry in a capitalist manner. Kautsky, who helped write the scriptures for the leftists, was elevated to the status of a capitalist, and the various social democratic parties in Europe, which were like the Bolsheviks' own brothers, were also seen as capitalism. During the period of leveling and adjustment, farmers raising a few chickens, ducks, or fish at home were also labeled as the tail of capitalism. If overseas Chinese relatives returned home and brought two glass-wrapped fruit candies, that was capitalism. Teresa Teng's songs were capitalism, Hong Kong and Taiwan videotapes were capitalism, tape recorders, bell-bottom pants, and frog-eye glasses were capitalism, hand-copied novels were capitalism, black market trading of foreign cigarettes was capitalism, salting one's own food was capitalism, biscuits with deer prints were capitalism, and selling paper flower wreaths made from homemade glue for funerals was capitalism. For a while, even picking a few wildflowers by the roadside to bring home and put in a vase was considered a capitalist lifestyle.

I bet if you dug up Jurassic fossils, leftists could find traces of capitalism.

Capitalism can be said to encompass everything, covering all of human civilization.

In this context, how can one ask how capitalism will perish?

If this "capitalism" were to perish, would there still be human civilization?

So the conclusion is clear: when a term is used to describe everything, it actually describes nothing at all. There is no such thing as "capitalism." The so-called "capitalism" is merely a label leftists place on everything they disapprove of, and this rhetoric is a complete linguistic corruption, a label created during the leftists' scramble for discourse power, and a tool for factional struggle.

As long as they wave this flag, leftists can act without restraint, with no taboos. They can seize grain in the countryside, enclose land for investment, implement urban-rural caste systems, ban strikes, prohibit commerce, cut off transportation, engage in terrorism, conduct secret police operations, create a garrison state, and if elections don't go their way, they can surround the venue with people. In any case, everything they do is to oppose the "capitalist" demon, right? Anyone who opposes what they do is standing with this great demon. If they stand with the demon, they must not be human; they must be expelled from humanity, defeated, and disgraced.

The whole thing exudes a sense of road confidence.

From this perspective, the term "capitalism" is very similar to the term "White Army" during the Russian Civil War. The Bolsheviks labeled all armed forces opposing them as the White Army, assuming they were all of the same ilk. In reality, the "White Army" was composed of a diverse array of groups: republicans, constitutionalists, local militias, bandits, military usurpers, separatists, nationalists, and even the Bolsheviks' own brothers, the Mensheviks. There were also the Czechoslovak Legion, which wanted nothing to do with Russian affairs and just wanted to get back home on their broken trains, and the Polish forces that only wanted to secure the railway lines and hitch a ride home with the Czechoslovak Legion.

Capitalism is the same; anyone who disagrees with leftist political, economic, and social views is labeled with the capitalist label. As for what these opponents think, whether they are of the same ilk, what differences exist among them, and whether their positions, views, and measures are consistent, that doesn't matter. In any case, I am leftist, and leftism is correct, so I am correct. Anyone who opposes me is capitalism, and capitalism is bad, so anyone who opposes me is bad.

Thus, leftists mourn and weep, angrily denouncing the restoration of capitalism and lamenting why capitalism hasn't perished yet. This attitude is truly comical.

The leftists' ancestor once said: If there is a twenty percent profit, capital will stir; if there is a fifty percent profit, capital will take risks; if there is a hundred percent profit, capital will dare to risk the gallows; if there is a three hundred percent profit, capital will dare to trample on all laws of the world.

He spoke too soon, for he had not seen his disciples. His disciples can demand to trample on all of humanity without even wanting to share the coins.

Loading...
Ownership of this post data is guaranteed by blockchain and smart contracts to the creator alone.