Marx Had It Right
Freedom and socialism go hand-in-hand
We think of Marx as the world’s top collectivist. But he was arguing from the value of human freedom. “Free market” economics inevitably leads to a lopsided concentration of power, so that ordinary people end up with no control over their own lives.
Capitalism may look like it’s just the freedom to do the work you want and spend your money as you personally see fit. But that’s not how it works out in practice.
It starts with simple economies of scale. This gives large companies an advantage over small companies. As companies grow larger, they have the opportunity to use anti-competitive practices to squelch competition; they grow larger yet and nail down their monopolistic advantage.
“Free market economics” leads eventually to monopoly capitalism. Big corporations have the power to buy government officials and create laws that favor big corporations. Individual people looking for employment are no match for the large employers, which can dictate salaries and terms of employment.
(Labor organizations are potentially a remedy for the asymmetrical employer-employee relationship; but unions also concentrate power and in the end they are subject to the same kinds of corruption as corporations. In America since Reagan, we have lost whatever balance organized labor might have provided. Even earlier, the pro-labor Wagner Act of 1935 was overwritten by the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947. Without a friendly legal environment, labor unions are easily broken by the power of big business, and as corporate power has prevailed over labor power, unions are no longer viable in the current economic environment. This, too, is an artifact of “free market economics”. Corporations are richer than unions, so they can buy the political influence that maintains and increases the advantage that corporations have in setting terms of employment.)
Eugene V Debs
Marx was prescient. In 1867, when he published the first edition of Das Kapital, the largest company in the world was the Pennsylvania Railroad, with 20,000 employees — about 0.001% of the world population at the time. The largest government employer was the Russian Imperial Army, with 700,000 soldiers. Today, the largest private employer is Walmart with over 2 million — 100 times larger in absolute terms, and 20x as a percentage of the world’s present population. The largest government employer is the US (not China!) with a payroll of almost 5 million people (including military). The Chinese national government funds employment of almost 100 million, but control of these workers is dispersed.
Another eye-opening comparison: In 1867, about 40% of the total revenue of Pennsylvania Railroad went to employee salaries. In 2024, Walmart pays employees about 20% of its total revenue. For Amazon, the figure is 17%, and it’s only 6% for the US Government. Automation has made workers vastly more productive, but all the benefit has gone to shareholders.
The top 0.01% of the world’s richest people have about 10 times as much money as the poorest 50%. For the bottom 50%, a little more money means a little breathing room, enough to eat for one more day. For the top 0.01%, more money means more power to control their employees and to buy government influence.
“We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.” — Louis D. Brandeis
The smart money in corporations and billionaire individuals is going into public relations. Twitter was purchased by Elon Musk. TikTok was just purchased by representatives of Oracle, the world’s largest spy enterprise. The Fox network is owned by Rupert Murdoch. MSNBC answers to Bill Gates. Video and social media platforms are controlled by Silicon Valley billionaires with convergent interest in keeping the rabble ignorant of what they are really doing. Pharma companies make sure that the print and broadcast media are dependent on their advertising for a big share of revenue.
Half of American workers don’t have stable employment. The other half live paycheck-to-paycheck, and their time is consumed working and commuting and shopping. There’s no time to think. There’s no time to organize or to take political action. Even if it’s not literally true that there’s “no time”, their lives are so full of anxiety and obedience that they don’t have the energy or the support that would enable them to forge a plan to escape from wage slavery, or even to imagine that a better world is possible.
What little energy we have for political activism is split between the Right and the Left. The Right wants more freedom for individuals. The Left wants more autonomy for workers. Where’s the difference, really? Yet they spend their energies neutralizing each other.
This is by design. The ruling elite knows that any real democracy would throw the bums out. The political parties are engineered to make sure that there is plenty of emotion and drama, but no opportunity for an anti-war or anti-corporate agenda. The media are saturated with messages that equate socialism with despotism, when the real message of socialism is to give working people an honest break.
The next wave of automation will not be aimed at blue collar workers, but rather millions of lawyers, computer programmers, managers, and bureaucrats will be out of a job. This will be our opportunity for solidarity. We will be out in the streets demanding real democracy and a level economic playing field.




Picky point: "Right" vs. "Left" in politics is just a divide-and-conquer strategy, to keep the 99% at each others' throats, to prevent them from getting together & going after the 1%. The majority of "Right" & "Left" politicians are all devoted to keeping the 1% happy (and in power), while pretending to be at odds w/ each other. In reality, the ONLY divide is between the 1% & the 99%. Any politician pointing this out is in a sufficiently small minority that their views are always voted down. This provides "proof" of democracy (LOL!). We're supposed to believe that the voters are simply not smart enough to elect pols who represent THEIR interests; but with electronic vote-flipping, it doesn't matter who everyone votes for, the vote "count" is rigged by software which is, by law, protected from scrutiny by the public. IMHO, the only way voters can defeat this is to refuse to vote. Then, at least, any pol claiming he/she got "a mandate from the voters"--when the voter turnout is 10%--will be recognized as the charlatan he/she is.
A great post ! Let me add a saying that Hagel (?) said , Freedom s the Recognition of Necessity .
Al D. , member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War