Black Marxism—A Marxist Critique

 

By August H. Nimtz

Reviewed by Steve Halpern

Today growing numbers of people understand that we are faced with fundamental problems. The United States launched an unprovoked war against the nation of Iran. For close to four years, the world has seen a livestreamed genocide against Palestinians. Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents are kidnapping our neighbors because they happen to be born in another country. I could go on. 

Nicole Hanna Jones, editor of the book The 1619 Project, pointed to another persistent issue that has been a constant feature in the history of the United States. “The effort of Black Americans to seek freedom through resistance and rebellion against violations of their rights have always been one of this nation’s defining traditions.”

August Nimtz’ book Black Marxism takes issue with books by Cedric Robinson and others who argue that the political orientation of Karl Marx is irrelevant to the struggle for Black liberation. After all, what could Marx, who lived his entire life in Europe, and never even visited the United States, have something relevant to say about the Black liberation struggle?

Karl Marx

To begin to appreciate the contributions of Marx, perhaps it is useful to look at his life story. Karl Marx was born in Germany at a time when that nation was ruled by a feudal monarch. His father needed to change his religion from Jewish to gain a lucrative job. Because of his controversial political activities Marx was exiled from his homeland.

Eventually Marx was able to live in Britain, a nation at the center of the capitalist world at that time. Frederick Engels wrote a book that deeply influenced Marx titled, The Condition of the Working-Class in England in 1844. This book reported on the unimaginably horrendous living and working conditions in the industrialized city of Manchester. 

So, this reality presented Marx and Engels with a problem. They understood that capitalism was a clear advance over the feudal system. Yet capitalism also produced horrendous conditions for workers, while a tiny minority lived in opulence. 

Looking at the capitalism from this perspective, Marx developed a way of looking at the world that was diametrically opposed to the view presented by most so-called history teachers here. Those teachers ask students to stand up, and pledge allegiance to a flag. They claim this flag represents “liberty and justice for all.” They also argue that everyone is supposed to have equal rights, and that we live in a “democracy.” 

In his studies of capitalism, Marx learned that the system needs to continually grow. For the system to grow, a surplus needs to be derived from the workers who produce the commodities we all need. Because of this state of affairs, the owners of capital, the capitalists, are continually obsessed with cutting their costs of production.

So, when you might have a disagreement with a boss, it isn’t just because the boss might be mean-spirited, or insensitive, or stupid. No, the interests of workers and capitalists are fundamentally antagonistic. This antagonist relationship also explains racist and sexist discrimination. This also explains why about 80% of the population of the world lives on ten dollars per day or less. 

Sven Beckert wrote a book titled Capitalism: A Global History. In this book, Beckert showed how capitalism has always been an international system. However, politicians routinely argue that our problems can be solved with a national or an America First agenda. In their Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels appealed to the “workers of the world.” Unlike the politicians we listen to today, Marx and Engels argued that workers all over the world ultimately have the same interests.  

I believe the quotation by Marx that most attracted August Nimtz is when is when he said, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it.” 

It is from this perspective that Nimtz dismantles those who argue that Marx’s example is basically irrelevant to Black liberation. Cedric Robinson argued that Marx had no theory on race. In Marx’s day, the primary struggle was about the abolition of the slave system. Yet Marx was well aware that workers needed to develop an anti-racist consciousness if they ever hoped to achieve liberation. 

We also know that Marx’s position evolved on nationalities who were discriminated against. Initially he believed that Irish workers could only become liberated when the more advanced British, workers liberated themselves. Then, he discovered those who were engaged in the struggle for Irish liberation. Marx eventually argued that British workers could not be liberated unless they support Irish liberation.

The former Boxing Heavyweight Champion Mohammed Ali had a few things to say about these issues.

“A man who views the world the same at fifty as he did at twenty has waisted thirty years of his life.”

“I am America. I am the part you don’t want to recognize. But get used to me. Black, confident, cocky; my name, not yours, my religion, not yours, my goals, my own; get used to me.”

I believe it was this kind of uncompromising attitude that convinced Marx to change his attitude on Irish liberation. Mohammed Ali, in effect, argued that Black people weren’t just part of the so-called “melting pot” of this country, but the Black community had its own independent ideas that represent a distinct perspective. 

Marx made it his top priority to support the Union forces in the Civil War. Ultimately the victory of the Union Army led to the abolition of slavery. The exception was in cases of penal servitude.

After the Civil War, Marx was discouraged by the policies of President Andrew Johnson, who worked to reimpose many of the aspects of the slave system. So, Marx wouldn’t have been totally surprised by the vicious defeat of Radical Reconstruction that led to the Jim Crow laws. That defeat effectively abolished citizenship rights for African Americans.  

Frederick Douglass

August Nimtz also wrote a book with Kyle Edwards where he compared the political lives of Frederick Douglass to Karl Marx. I haven’t read that book, but Nimtz wrote about Douglass and Marx in his book Black Marxism. Nimtz labeled Douglass a “revolutionary liberal.” In my opinion that characterization is unwarranted. 

In his 1852 speech about what the Fourth of July meant to the slave, Douglass had this to say. “For shameless hypocrisy and ruthless barbarity, America reins without a rival.” In my opinion, this was not a statement of a liberal.

Perhaps the reason why Nimtz gives Douglass the liberal label is because he did not advocate for an abolition of capitalism. I believe we get a better understanding of who Frederick Dougass was by looking at his life story. His autobiography is a classic in the literature of this country.

Frederick Douglass was born a slave and witnessed the unimaginable horrors of chattel slavery. At the age of 19 he escaped enslavement and, for the first time, learned how wage labor had fundamental advantages over the system of chattel slavery.

Douglass was enslaved when he worked on the shipyards of Baltimore. Then he saw how three workers in Massachusetts were doing the work of twelve slaves in Baltimore. Also, the workers in Massachusetts were paid a wage and might have their own home where they could raise a family.

Douglass also saw how there was racist discrimination in the North. In spite of this, he viewed northern capitalism as a fundamental improvement from the enslavement he endured.

On the other hand, when Karl Marx was introduced to the capitalist system in Britain he viewed an unimaginable horror story. This contrast in the lives of Marx and Douglass begins to explain why they looked at the world differently.

When it came to the Civil War, Marx and Douglass agreed that the government of the slave owners needed to be decisively defeated. They both saw the limitations of President Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln initially argued that the war was about preserving the union. Both Marx and Douglass understood that the Civil War was about abolishing slavery and celebrated when Lincoln issued his Emancipation Proclamation.

Both Marx and Douglass understood how the hundreds of thousands who escaped enslavement would play an invaluable role in defeating the slaveocracy. However, they also believed that the enslavers could only be defeated with the full force of the Union Army.

August Nimtz, I believe, accurately argues that Marx and Douglass had different reasons for supporting the abolition of slavery. Douglass’ primary goal in life was to see an end to chattel slavery. Marx felt that the abolition of slavery was a necessary step for the working class in their eventual overthrow of the capitalist system.

Nimtz was critical of Douglass for not supporting a land distribution to freed slaves, as proposed by Thaddeus Stevens. We can only speculate as to Douglass’ thinking with respect to this issue. What we know is that because of the Union victory in the Civil War, Douglass changed his critical view of the United States government. He became an Ambassador to Haiti and was the President of a bank. 

However, as Mohammed Ali said, “A man who views the world the same at fifty as he did at twenty has waisted thirty years of his life.”

In 1894, towards the end of his life, Douglass gave his masterful speech Lessons of the Hour. Here he distanced himself from the vicious racist repression he saw in the North and the South. He advocated to enforce the Constitution that would have given Black people the rights they were supposed to have. However, Douglass wasn’t familiar with the ideas of Marx and his advocacy of a worker’s government that would make human needs the fundamental priority.

Ida Wells

August Nimtz mentioned several leaders who made outstanding contributions to the struggle for Black liberation. These include John Brown, WEB DuBois, CLR James, Malcolm X, Maurice Bishop, and Thomas Sankara. He didn’t mention the name Ida Wells, who was a friend of Frederick Douglass. 

I believe both Ida Wells and Douglass agreed with Marx when he argued that they weren’t about interpreting the world, but about changing it. Wells became a champion in the struggles against lynching as well as the liberation of women. In my opinion, Ida Wells, in a way, was a bridge from the politics of Frederick Douglass to the politics of Malcolm X.  

Malcolm X argued that the struggle for Black liberation needs to be advanced “By any means necessary.” Ida Wells argued that Black people need to reserve a special place in their home for a “Winchester rifle,” to defend against lynch mobs. 

Malcolm viewed the liberation of women as necessary to the struggle. Ida Wells shared that view. 

Private property

August Nimtz reported that the primary goal of Karl Marx was the abolition of private property. When workers think about that, they might conclude that a socialist government would take away our toothbrushes. This is the kind of slander spread by the mainstream so-called “news media.” So, what did Marx mean when he argued for the abolition of private property?

In the capitalist world, the owners of capital own and control the productive forces of society. Workers go to work, but capitalists control the work environment, as well as the prices we pay. While workers do the work, capitalists produce nothing useful, but reap the profits.

We were all raised to believe that banks finance corporations. Marx argued that to produce a commodity in the capitalist system there are three requirements. These are labor, the materials and machinery, and what he called “surplus value.” 

For Marx, surplus value doesn’t merely consist of profits. There are entire enterprises such as banks, insurance companies, advertising agencies, corporate law firms, and landlords. These enterprises do not directly produce useful commodities. However, the surplus derived from the production and distribution of commodities effectively finances all these enterprises. In other words, workers, in a real way finance banks. Banks merely absorb the surplus derived from the workers who produce commodities.

So, when Marx argued for the abolition of private property, he was arguing for an end to the antagonistic relationship between workers and capitalists. A worker’s government would make it their top priority to use the means of production to serve the needs of all workers and farmers.

The outstanding singer Etta James has a song where she said she wanted “security.” This song is about a relationship James had with someone she loved. However, isn’t security something we all want? Don’t we all want the right to have a decent place to live, food to eat, clothing, health care, education, transportation, communication, and exposure to culture.

In the capitalist world we need money to get these things. We can only have money if we work for an employer who is obsessed with gouging out profits. Even after we worked our entire lives, we need to have the money to provide for our basic necessities. This drive for profits is the root cause of racist discrimination. 

We won’t have an egg unless there first is a chicken. There can only be racist discrimination because of an outgrowth of capitalist exploitation.

I believe August Nimtz book Black Marxism makes the argument that the working class will not be liberated unless it unconditionally supports Black liberation. The reverse is also true. Only the entire working class has the potential power to bring about a political-economic system that can begin to erase all vestiges of racist discrimination.

Zohran Mamdani and the Democratic Socialists of America

The election of Zohran Mamdani as Mayor of New York City raises the question: What do socialists stand for? In my opinion, there are a few ways to answer this question.

First, Mamdani’s opposition to the genocide organized against Palestinians separates him from mainstream democratic and republican politicians. 

Mamdani, who is Muslim and born in Uganda actively worked to recruit the diverse communities of New York City. I can’t recall other candidates who had that kind of success in celebrating the international character of this country. This contrasts with the politics of President Trump, as well as Democratic Party politicians. They support agents of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) who kidnap and deport our neighbors merely because they were born in another country.

However, Mamdani has no plans to aid in the mobilization of working people to ultimately take the control of the productive forces we all deal with. As I have attempted to argue, capitalism has its own driving forces. Those forces work continually to compromise the interests of the working class around the world. 

This means that as capitalism continues to deteriorate, Mamdani will be unable to institute fundamental change. I believe that August Nimtz’s book Black Marxism gives us the background to the history of the movement for Black liberation. That history gives us many inspiring examples of how working people indeed have the capacity to mobilize and bring about fundamental change.

The Fort Bragg Cartel—Drug Trafficking and Murder in the Special Forces

 

By Seth Harp, 2025 

Viking—Penguin Random House 

Reviewed by Steve Halpern

Recently the United States destroyed several boats in the Caribbean Sea and caused the deaths of over 200 people who were on board. President Donald Trump argued that the United States is in “armed conflict” with drug cartels. We might also consider that the Drug Enforcement Administration is funded to the tune of about $3.25 billion. As I’m writing this review, Secretary of War Peter Hegseth is planning to conduct military operations in several Latin American nations. The pretense for this military action is to battle against “designated terrorist organizations.” 

In Seth Harp’s best-selling book, The Fort Bragg Cartel—Drug Trafficking and Murder in the Special Forces, he makes the following statement that questions the motives of the government in their supposed effort to battle drug trafficking. 

“Throughout its history, the CIA has worked to achieve American national security objectives in partnership with known drug traffickers, including the anti-communist Kuomintang, the founders of modern-day Taiwan; Frances’s Corsican mafia syndicates; Cuban exiles opposed to Fidel Castro; Hmong irregulars in Laos as well as the Royal Lao Army; and the contra rebels in Nicaragua. But American foreign policy elites’ complicity in the international drug trade was never so substantial, sustained, witting, and consequential as in Afghanistan.”

To begin to see how military officers became involved in drug trafficking we need to look at the elite Delta Force. These are the soldiers who go through the most rigorous training. Military commanders are very particular about who is chosen.

President Jimmy Carter gave the orders for the Delta Force to attempt a rescue of U.S. personnel who had been held in Iran. The Iranians had just carried out a revolution where they deposed the hated dictator the Shah Riza Pahlavi. Carter gave refuge to Pahlavi, and this sparked the Iranian people to detain members of the United States embassy. 

Carter ordered Delta Force officers to attempt a rescue of U.S. personnel who had been detained. That effort failed.

When President Regan came into office, he modernized the Delta Force into the Fort Bragg based Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC). JSOC officers also supported the contras who opposed the revolutionary Sandinista government in Nicaragua. The contras were known to partially fund their efforts by drug trafficking.

Seth Harp’s book reads like a novel, but the story he reported on was corroborated by facts uncovered by his research. Harp served in the United States Army Reserve and did a tour of duty in Iraq. So, rather than give a full outline of his book, I will look at three of the characters who, directly or indirectly, contributed to drug trafficking in Fort Bragg and the surrounding area of North Carolina.

General Stanley McChrystal

General Stanley McChrystal headed up the JSOC forces under the Administration of President Obama. He quadrupled the number of Delta Force combatants in Afghanistan. 

During his time directing forces in Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai was the effective ruler of the country. Seth Harp reported that “Karzai’s government was primarily a military-industrial money-laundering machine for transatlantic security elites, a corrupt conduit through which a trillion dollars of U.S. taxpayer dollars flowed, but secondarily and almost as important, it was a massive drug cartel that produced nearly all of the world’s illicit opiates.”

General McChrystal acknowledged that “Too often,” American proxies were “corrupt and despised warlords whom we paid handsomely.”

McCrystal organized teams of Delta Force soldiers, Navy Seals, and Army Rangers to carry out night raids where these forces murdered up to 100 Afghans and leveled entire villages.

In 2015 The New York Times did an expose titled, SEAL Team 6: A secret History of Quiet Killings and Blurred Lines. This article reported that the Seal team had been assassinating a dozen or more people every night for years on end.

However, the lead organization in those raids was Delta Force. Billy Lavigne was one of the Delta Force officers who did several tours of duty in Afghanistan under the command of General McChrystal. Lavigne is one of the central true-life characters in Seth Harp’s book.   

Freddie Wayne Huff

Freddie Wayne Huff was a police officer first recruited in Lexington, North Carolina. He was effective in stopping motorists and confiscating large amounts of cash. Because of Huff’s $9 million in confiscations the police department in his district was able to modernize.

Then Huff had a discussion with Karl Culberson, a drug enforcement officer who also had experience working for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). This is the advice Culberson gave to Huff regarding his drug enforcement work.

“What you think you’re doing is noble.” “But they want it here. You’re a pawn. Everything you’re doing is in vain.”

Then Huff pulled over an inebriated insurance executive who had been a donor to the Governor. The executive warned Huff that he would have his job for writing the ticket. Within a month Huff was fired from the police department.

Needing to support a family, Huff got a job shipping appliances needing repair to Mexico. He learned that the owner of the company he worked with was also connected to the Los Zetas Mexican drug cartel.

Because of his experience of apprehending motorists, Huff was effective evading searches by the police. This is how police officer Freddie Wayne Huff became the largest drug dealer in North Carolina.

Huff maintained a close friendship with Chief Warrant Officer Timothy Dumas who was stationed at Fort Bragg. Dumas came under a cloud of suspicion for misappropriation of government funds, as well as using and selling illegal drugs. He resigned from the service and formed a partnership with Huff to expand drug dealing to Fort Bragg.

Huff also worked with Billy Lavigne who was a Delta Force officer. Lavigne also sold drugs at Fort Bragg and did several tours of duty in Afghanistan. Lavigne and Timothy Dumas were murdered and became two of 109 military officers who lost their lives at Fort Bragg in a two year period.

Gene Paul Thacker

Gene Paul Thacker was a first-generation Special Forces officer who served in Korea and Vietnam. After his time in the military Thacker purchased a municipal airport in the vicinity of Fort Bragg. Green Berets have used his airfield in their parachuting practices. 

Declassified FBI files and court records reported that Thacker maintained a small fleet of turboprop planes to smuggle huge amounts of cocaine into the North Carolina. Although Gene Thacker was never convicted of a crime, his son, took over the business. Tim Thacker would eventually plead guilty to drug trafficking and firearms charges. 

These drug traffickers who were former police or military officers were able to get away with their illegal activities for many years. Harp documented how the police as well as military commanders refused to prosecute officers for crimes such as possession or trafficking of illegal drugs, rape, and murder. 

There was a documentary film titled Invisible War that reported on many rapes in the military were there was no effort to prosecute the perpetrators. The producers of this film estimated that there are thousands of rapes in the military every year.

The U.S. military eventually left Afghanistan. The Taliban that had been in power before the U.S. occupation returned to power. Clearly the Taliban is a repressive regime. However, Seth Harp reported that the evidence shows that the Taliban eliminated the drug business from Afghanistan. Because that source of heroin was eliminated, a new market in fentanyl erupted. 

The information about U.S. government complicity with the international drug trade isn’t new. There was Alfred W. McCoy’s book The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade published in 1972, 1991 and 2003. There was the film American Gangster starring Denzel Washington. Yet President Trump claims that the government is in “armed conflict” with drug cartels. Seth Harp’s book gives us more evidence that exposes the blatant dishonesty of routine government policy.

Alfonso Fanjul and the Cuban Revolution

 

By Steve Halpern

Today I read the obituary of Alfonso Fanjul Jr. in the New York Times. Mr. Fanjul and his family made a fortune because workers toiled in unimaginably horrendous conditions to produce sugar in Cuba. Clearly this wasn’t how the New York Times reported his business dealings. So, perhaps a bit of background to the political-economic system of capitalism would be useful.

Adam Smith and David Ricardo both gave the definitive versions of how capitalism works. They called this the “labor theory of value.” In other words, labor is the essential ingredient in producing all wealth. 

Sugar cane workers routinely toiled under the scorching sun to cut the sugar cane that gives the world sugar. However, in Cuba, before the revolution, these workers only had work for three months during the year. There was no unemployment insurance for the rest of the year. These workers had little or no access to education or health care.

To maintain that inhuman system, there were the rural guards who did literally whatever they wanted. Resistance to the rural guards was punished by torture or death. Clearly these stories weren’t reported in the press. 

Maintaining these conditions was how the Fanjul family grew their fortune to encompass 90,000 acres, mansions, as well as expensive art collections. 

Then came the Cuban Revolution. Alfonso Fanjul learned about the Cuban Revolution at a New Years Eve party he was celebrating at the Havana Yacht Club.

Then he described a meeting between the Fanjul family and representatives of the new Cuban Revolutionary government. Clearly, this new government had more in common with the sugar cane workers than the Fanjul family and their friends at the Havana Yacht Club. So, the new government representatives started the meeting by placing machine guns on the table.

Because the Cuban government supported the interests of workers and farmers, the people began to have rights they never had before. After the revolution there was a literacy campaign where nearly everyone on the island learned how to read. Health care and education became lifetime rights for all Cubans. This was made possible because the Cuban government prioritized workers and farmers before the interests of who profited from their labor.

The Fanjuls then moved their business to South Florida and profited from Jamaican workers who cut the sugar cane. They gave generously to candidates in both the Democratic and Republican Parties. Those contributions were rewarded with tariffs that made the cost of sugar three times higher in the United States than it would have been without those tariffs. Consumers paid billions of dollars in inflated prices to further enrich the Fanjul family.

Alfonso Fanjul also gave $2.5 million to the political campaigns of Donald Trump. The Fanjuls also had holdings in Central Romana Corp. that invested in the sugar industry in the Dominican Republic. 

The Biden Administration had a ban on sugar imports from the D.R. because of allegations of forced labor. The Trump Administration lifted that ban, giving the Fanjul family the opportunity to make more money. However, among the attendees at Alfonso Fanjul’s funeral were former President Bill Clinton, as well as former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. Apparently, when it comes to enriching billionaires, the democrats and republicans have little to argue about.   

Yes, there is a clear disparity between the politics of Alfonso Fanjul Jr. and the politics of the Cuban government. The New York Times estimates the wealth of the Fanjul family at $4 billion. Although Cuba is a poor country, Cuban doctors have been treating some of the least affluent patients all over the world. Students from numerous countries learned to be doctors because they were trained in Cuba free of charge.

I believe that health care and education in Cuba are more important priorities than the drive to enrich the former members of the Havana Yacht Club. Clearly the United States government doesn't agree with this opinion. That is why they have been working to overthrow that government since 1959. When we look at the current drive to starve the Cuban people with an oil embargo, we might consider the times when the Fanjul family lived in opulence while the Cuban people struggled to survive.

The Sheer Insanity of Capitalism

 

By Steve Halpern

Today there is a growing disconnect between political office holders and the majority of the population. The idea that politicians support the interests of working people is growing very thin. So, I would like to look at the seeming insanity of what the normal functioning of the capitalist system looks like.

The insanity

First, employers hire workers for one reason. That is to gouge out profits. Although the government doesn't directly generate profits, history has shown that government officials have consistently supported capitalist interests. The so-called "non-profit" organizations rely on funding from profitable corporations. So, in one way or another, we all work to enrich some of the most affluent people in the world. 

In order to understand the totality of capitalism, we need to look at a few facts. Yes, employers are in business to generate profits. However, employers generally have expenses that add no value to the goods and services we want and need. These include: interest payments to banks, insurance premiums, advertising, corporate law firms, landlords, and the so-called "war or defense department."

Thinking about this reality, we might make a basic conclusion. Working our entire lives so employers might profit, should be enough to provide for our basic needs. Well, that's not the case. 

In addition to generating profits for employers, we need to pay taxes. Since the government works to support employers, we need to ask the question: In reality are we paying taxes, or are taxes, in effect, unpaid wages? 

Is this a "democracy"?

The the so-called "news media" argues that government officials are elected, and therefore the actions of the government are ultimately the result of a "democratic" process. 

However, there are many political parties that run in the elections. There were about 15 parties that were on the ballot in several states in the Presidential elections. However, the news media consistently ignored the campaigns of all these parties except for the Democrats and Republicans. These happen to be the parties that have consistently supported capitalist interests. 

One of the priorities of these candidates is to fund the police and the Defense or War Departments. They argue that we need to fund these agencies so we can be safe. 

So, there are the local, state, and federal police forces. Then, there is the National Security Agency that keeps an eye on everyone here. There is the Central Intelligence Agency that keeps an eye on nations around the world. The military in this country has been used for aggressive military actions all over the world.    

But all these investments are inadequate to keep us safe. We need to pay astronomical amounts of money to insurance companies, just in case something might happen. Before we pay out this money, we all know that insurance agents will never directly give us health care, or repair our automobiles, or rebuild a damaged home. No, insurance companies are in business to profit from the uncertainty that is a constant feature of the capitalist system. 

So, since this system makes no sense, why do people put up with it? In answering this question, first it is useful to look at nations where people overthrew governments with political revolutions. There were revolutions in Russia, China, Vietnam, and Cuba. In these nations, masses of people began to realize that the political system they lived under was no longer tolerable. That sentiment, combined with a competent leadership allowed those revolutions to erupt.

The irrational justifications of capitalism

The capitalist system needs to continually grow. We see this every day in the increasing stock market prices. Banks only invest money because they can get a larger return on their investments. 

This need for capitalism to grow partially explains why there have been significant improvements in the standard of living. The other reason has to do with the labor, civil rights, and women's movements demanding improved living standards, as well as equality. 

Workers understand the profound injustice of working so someone else can profit. However, when the standard of living was improving, many workers tolerated this obvious injustice.

For the past fifty years, the standard of living has been deteriorating for the majority of the population. Millions of manufacturing jobs were automated or left the country. Prices for health care and education have skyrocketed. Yet the stock market is at an all time high.

Some people were attracted to Donald Trump when he argued that he wanted to, "drain the swamp." However, after he became President, his basic policies were in fundamental agreement with the mainstream of the democratic party. He adamantly supports Israeli organized genocide. He aggressively works to deport people who were born in other countries. 

Clearly, Trump's tactics are more aggressive than the democrats. However, Trump and the democrats are both in favor of the economy that enriches billionaires while subjecting millions of people to struggle in abject poverty.  

While Trump and the democrats are agreed with maintaining the gross inequality here, they work to glorify this country and its history. Trump has gone to the extent of posting signs at museum entrances warning visitors of "inaccurate information." Then, there is James Loewen's 1995 book titled, "Lies My Teacher Told Me."

In 2008, the stock market crashed. The investment companies Bear Sterns and Lehmann Brothers went out of business. This crash didn't happen because of mistakes or insensitivity. That crash, like the one in 1929, were inevitable because the contradictions of the capitalist system cause the system to explode.

We are the working class of the world

One of the ways capitalists maintain their power is to create divisions in the working class. They create divisions between Black and white workers, women and men, citizens and immigrants etc... 

Capitalists also want us to identify with the United States. However, the owners of corporations profit from workers all over the world.

The facts are that our interests are in common with workers in other countries. We all need a place to live, food to eat, health care, and transportation. Yet capitalists profit off of all those goods and services. 

This means that we have a real interest in identifying as workers of the world, and not as citizens of one or another country. Looking at politics from this perspective, working people have a real interest in fighting against all racist and sexist discriminatory practices. Immigrants aren't a problem, but our sister and brother workers. An injury to one is an injury to all.

The working class of the world is a sleeping giant. Since we produce all the goods and services, we have real potential power. As capitalism continues to deteriorate, we can use that power to end the sheer insanity we live with every day.             

The Similarities and Differences Between Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler

 

By Steve Halpern

Since the election of President Donald Trump, there has been an increasing consolidation of power by the executive branch of government. The drive to deport people who were born in other countries has accelerated. The government openly supports the Israeli organized genocide, as well as an unprovoked war against the people of Iran. 

Masses of people protested against this consolidation in demonstrations demanding "No Kings." Some people have gone so far as to argue that today the United States is a fascist dictatorship. So, I believe it is useful to look at the historical record to determine what are the similarities and differences between Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler. 

To begin, both Hitler and Trump operate within the capitalist political-economic system. The essence of capitalism is the antagonistic relationship between the working class and the capitalists. While the working class produces everything, capitalists own the corporations where we work. Yet, the so-called news media calls this same system a "democracy."

One of the laws of capitalism is the need for the economy to continually grow. We see this in the increasing stock market prices. Yet as this market increases, tens of millions of people struggle to have enough food to eat. 

Capitalism in decline

So, we can say that both Hitler and Trump came to power during times when the capitalist economies in their countries were in periods of decline.

Germany lost the First World War. The allied powers made an agreement at the Versailles to punish Germany for the war. As a result, inflation in Germany skyrocketed. Middle class people saw their life savings disintegrate. The price of basic food items became unaffordable. 

In the United States there was an economic upturn from the end of the Second World War until the 1970's. During the beginning of this period, the United States produced about 60% of the commodities in the world.

Then, the United States needed to pay for the war against Vietnam and President Nixon took the U.S. dollar off the gold standard. Millions of manufacturing jobs either went overseas, or were automated. Today about 50% of the commodities in the world are manufactured in Asia.

So, since the 1970's millions of manufacturing jobs vanished. Those jobs were replaced with lower paying jobs. Presidential candidates argue that the rate of unemployment has gone down. Well, there are more jobs because wages and benefits have deteriorated. This happened because of the continual drive to lower production costs.

As a result, over 700 hospitsls closed, while health care costs have skyrocketed. 

Corporations did away with tens of thousands of pension plans. Now workers need to pay for their own pensions with 401K savings plans. 

Tuition at Rutgers University went from $200 in 1972 to $17,900 today. 

The prison population ballooned from about 300,000 to about 2,000,000 today. In the past, workers might earn $20 per hour at a factory job. Today inmates in prisons are paid about $2 per day and the government pays for housing prisoners in their dungeons. 

Creating scapegoats

So, in both Germany and the United States there was a justifiable rage against the deteriorating standard of living. Both Hitler and Trump created scapegoats to deflect the anger away from the real cause of the deteriorating conditions. These were the capitalists who continue to gouge out profits, even when the economy is in decline.

Hitler blamed the crisis on communists and Jews. Trump blamed the deteriorating conditions on immigrants. Recently, Trump followed Hitler's lead and falsly pointed to communists as the source of our problems.

In Germany there were Socialist and Communist Parties that combined to have the support of the majority of the population. Yet, while those parties claimed to support Marxism, they didn't take steps to lead a revolution that would have created a genuine workers government. 

So, both Hitler and Trump were elected with a minority of the voting population. Hitler came to power because of the division between the Social Democrats and the Communists. Trump initially came to power because of the undemocratic Electoral College. 

Hitler burned down the Reichstag that was the German capital. He replaced all government officials. He sent political opponents to concentration camps. After about six years, he consolidated power and began sending Jews, gays, and Gypsies to concentration camps. 

The secret to the upturn in the German economy under Hitler came from the fact that real wages plummeted by about 50%. Protesters against these conditions would be murdered or sent to concentration camps. 

Donald Trump is obsessed with issuing huge tariffs on nations all over the world. He argues that this will encourage manufacturing here. What are the facts?

Today, 50% of all manufactured commodities in the world come from Asia. Everyone knows that these industries will not return to the United States. So, the tariffs only benefit the most affluent people in this country who profit off of international competition.

Imperialism, the highest stage of capitalism

Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, the central leader of the Russian Revolution, argued that "Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism." He documented how in the early 20th century imperialist cartels dominated economies all over the world. This drive to dominate the world was the primary reason why two world wars erupted.

Hitler understood that for the German economy to rebound, he needed to dominate nations all over Europe. Part of his economic recovery plan was about supporting massive investments in the military.

We might consider that the United States was the world's superpower since the Second World War. The U.S. dollar has been the international currency. 

The U.S. military went to war against the nations of Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq. The U.S. government ended those wars either with a defeat or lacking a decisive victory. 

Today several countries are breaking away from U.S. dominance. Yet, just as in the case of fascist Germany, capitalism in the United States is in the position of trying to maintain the dominant position in the world.

This led the Trump Administration to kidnap Venezuela's President Nicholas Maduro and his wife. Today the Trump Administration has expanded the embargo against Cuba to prohibit the island from getting the oil it needs to function.

President Trump argues that he is at war against Iran to prevent that nation from getting atomic weapons. However, Iran made extraordinary concessions to ensure that they would not develop atomic bombs. The United States rejected these efforts.

The real reasom for the war against the Iranian people is the U.S. drive to control the oil resources of the world.   

During the Battle for Stalingrad during the Second World War, Hitler's general pleaded with him to retreat, rather than face total defeat of his army. Hitler refused and demanded that his forces fight to the death. 

Today, the U.S. armed forces have been effectively defeated in its war against Iran. Yet President Trump demands that the military continue the war, and that the government give him more billions of dollars to murder more Iranians. 

As Lenin argued, these were not military mistakes in judgement. Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism. Trump argues that the "War" budget be increased to $1.5 trillion. He makes this argument knowing that tens of millions of people in this country struggle to have enough food to eat. 

We can also say that President Biden increased funding to Israel to about $20 billion. This allowed Israel to unleash a genocide against Palestinians. This while working people here have experienced a dramatic decline in the standard of living.

Thinking about this seeming madness, I believe we can say that Presidents Obama, Biden, and Trump are in agreement with British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher when she argued that "there is no other way."

There is another way

Well, I believe there is another way. However, that way requires a complete break from capitalist political-economic relations.

We all contribute to several enterprises that add no value to the goods and services we all need and want. I'm talking about profits to corporations, interest payments to banks, insurance premiums, advertising, corporate law, landlords, and the military.

Imagine for a moment, that the resources that support these enterprises were used to supply everyone with the goods and servies we all need and want. We would all have an improved standard of living, while working fewer years to provide for all the things we need.

Today, I disagree with those who argue that we live in a fascist environment. If that was the case, protest meetings and demonstrations would be prohibited. I would be arreated for writing this blog. Yet we see how the government is moving in that direction.

I don't believe that the working class will tolerate a continual world-wide depression. Yes, we are justifiably angry because of our deteriorating standard of living. This while billionaires are laughing all the way to the bank.

Working people are beginning to see that we don't have much of a future with the current system. When that system collapses, people will be looking for answers to fundamental questions. 

If working people fail to make a basic transitional change, then we will be seeing the unimaginable horrors of what fascist Germany brought to the world.

Caste—The Origins of Our Discontents

By Isabel Wilkerson

Random House—2020, 2023

Reviewed by Steve Halpern

When I attended public schools, my teachers asked me to stand up every day, place my hand over my heart, and pledge allegiance to the flag. Included in that pledge were the words that this country representes "liberty and justice for all." 

Then, there were the words of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution that argued how the word "equality" is supposed to represent something in this country. Based on these facts, my teachers argued that the United States is an exceptional nation that has the greatest democracy in the world.

Isabel Wilkerson's book Caste—The Origins of Our Discontents gives us a different view of this country. She argues that our reality is made up of dominant and subordinate castes. She compares what she calls the caste system here to the caste system of India and the vicious anti-Semitic policies of Nazi Germany. 

Wilkerson's book has a similar theme as Michelle Alexander's book The New Jim Crow—Mass incarceration in the age of color blindness, and the book The 1619 Project edited by Nicole Hanna Jones. These three books present the evidence of how discrimination against Black people has been a constant throughout the history of this country.

For me, there are positive and negative aspects to Wilkerson's book. She is an excellent writer and presents evidence to support her point of view that is thoroughly documented. She also gives recollections from her personal experience that corroborate her conclusion. Unlike other contemporary books about the history of racist discrimination, her book gives parallels to the caste system in India and the Nazi organized Holocaust. 

The basic problem with Wilkerson's book is that she all but ignores the fact that the capitalist political-economic system dominates the world. With capitalism there is the capitalist class that owns the means of production. Then, there is the working class that produces all the goods and services we need and want.

While capitalists, as well as their supporters in the government, argue that they support everyone's interests, the reality tells another story. Because capitalists produce no useful commodities, they are motivated to maximize profits from the production of all commodities. Therefore, the interests of capitalists and workers are antagonistic in spite of all arguments to the contrary. 

Wilkerson argues that people who are a part of the working class have the potential to escape that class and become professionals or small business owners. However, Black people who escape the working class continue to be Black and continue to be exposed to discrimination. While this is true, the facts are that the working class was created to serve the interests of capitalists. As long as capitalism exists, there will be a working class. 

Another problem with the book Caste is that Wilkerson skims over the root causes of why there was a caste system in India, as well as why there was and is racist discrimination here. In order to understand the causes for these systems we first need to see how and why feudalism is different from capitalism. 

The primary classes of feudalism are the royal families, the religious clerics, the craft guilds, and the peasantry. In this system, religious clerics have real power. Many settlers came to this part of the world from England to escape religious intolerance. When the U.S. Constitution argued for freedom of religion, this was a truly revolutionary statement.

So, Indian religious clerics designed the caste system to adopt to the reality of feudalism in India. The Brahmin caste was the most prestigious. The Dalit caste otherwise known as the untouchables, was the subordinate caste. Although the Indian government officially abolished the caste system, the traditions of the past continue.

The United States was born in a revolution against feudalism and colonialism. The colonists replaced the rule of a royal family with the rule of an elected government. There were and are three branches of the federal government that operate in a supposed system of checks and balances.

However, those three branches of government have consistently supported the interests of the affluent. The President isn't elected by popular vote, but by the electoral college. The members of the Supreme Court are appointed. Initially members of the Senate were appointed by state governments. The Congress is the only branch of government that was directly voted for by citizens. 

The central leader of the Russian Revolution was Vladimir Ilyich Lenin who wrote a pamphlet titled State and Revolution. In that pamphlet Lenin argued that the state was invented to serve capitalist interests as a "special instrument of repression."

We see this in the very first actions of the United States government. This government continued the genocidal war against Native Americans. They continued the institution of chattel slavery. They used armed force to suppress both the Shay's and Whisky rebellions.

However, this new ruling power wasn't about enriching royal families. Capitalists used international trade to profit from the sale of commodities. 

So, the systematic discrimination against Black people was always about the exploitation of their labor. Racist attitudes weren't about maintaining a caste system, but about generating profits to the owners of capital. While there were clear similarities between racist discrimination and caste rule, those systems operated under different driving forces.

The very idea of race originated with capitalism to rationalize the theft of Black people and their labor. As Wilkerson and many other authors have pointed out, there is absolutely no scientific basis for separating people in racial groups. All human being have basically the same genetic makeup. There was a need for people to toil under unimaginably brutal conditions. This explains why the ruling powers promoted the absurd idea that Black people were less than human. 

However, the slave system had its own dynamics. Slave owners wanted an agriculturally dominated nation where slave labor was the norm. Northern industrialists wanted to develop industry with workers who are paid a wage. Workers and small farmers also preferred wage labor and free farmers to chattel slavery. These contradictions sparked the Civil War.

After the Union forces defeated the army fighting for slavery, there was a period of reconstruction. In that brief period, there were the beginnings of democracy where Black people would begin to gain real equal rights. However, as we have seen, the idea of equal rights were never a real priority for the United States government.

So, the federal government abandoned reconstruction and effectively gave power to terrorist gangs like the Ku Klux Klan. Those gangs overthrew the reconstruction governments by force. Then, all branches of the federal government actively supported the flagrant violation of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution. Black people were effectively stripped of their citizenship rights with the system of Jim Crow segregation. 

After 350,000 Union soldiers died in the Civil War, we can ask the question: Why did officials in all three branches of government agree to reimpose many of the aspects of slavery with Jim Crow segregation? The clear answer is that capitalists needed people to do to worst jobs at the lowest pay in order to gouge out profits. This was and continues to be the driving force of institutionalized racist discrimination.       

The Invisible Man

In the year 1952 Ralph Ellison published his groundbreaking novel, The Invisible Man. Ellison's main character was rejected in his many efforts to live a somewhat normal life. Responding to those rejections this Black character viewed himself as "invisible" to the mainstream world.

Today, while institutionalized racist discrimination continues, Black people are no longer invisible. The primary reasons for this were the mass movements that demanded fundamental change. These included the civil rights movement, the Black Power movement, and the hundreds of rebellions that erupted in towns and cities all over the country. Elizabeth Hinton reported on the history of these rebellions in her book America on Fire.

All these movements created a change in consciousness to the point where a majority of the population voted for Barrack Obama to become President. So, we can ask the question: If there has been a change in consciousness with respect to race relations, why does institutionalized discrimination continue? 

The fundamental problem with Wilkerson's book Caste is that she ignores the idea of class. She is not alone in this. When we look at the news stories emanating from the mainstream news media, it would appear that the working class doesn't even exist. For them, we are invisible.

We might consider that literally everything we need and want is produced by working people all over the world. The food we eat, the clothes we wear, the homes we live in, and the cars we ride in are all produced by the working class. 

When we need medical assistance, we try to see a doctor. That doctor wouldn't be able to function without the support of entire staffs of housekeepers, laundry and dietary workers. Yet many people, including the press and government officials, view these essential workers as invisible. As we know, a disproportionate number of people who have these jobs are African American. 

The fifty year decline in the economy of the United States

At the end of the Second World War the United States became the superpower of the world. The economies of the other major capitalist powers had been destroyed in the war. As a result, about 60% of the commodities in the world were manufactured in the United States. This financial upturn lasted up until the 1970's.

Today, about 50% of the commodities in the world are manufactured in Asia. This shift in production, as well as the ruthless drive for automation, caused the elimination of tens of millions of manufacturing jobs here. 

Yet politicians argue that they somehow create jobs. Yes, there were many new jobs added to the economy since the 1970's. However, most of those jobs have fewer benefits and effectively less pay than the manufacturing jobs of the past. 

One of the effects of this profound change has been a dramatic increase in inequality. The section of the working class that has been hit hardest by this deteriorating standard of living has been the least affluent 20% of the population. Black people are disproportionately represented in this part of the working class.

Isabel Wilkerson, as well as many others, argue that there can be profound inequality contained in a system they feel is democratic. This idea goes back to the revolution of the thirteen colonies that established the nation called the United States of America.

Before the revolution, affluent people like Benjamin Franklyn were second class citizens. The inherited class of gentleman held power. 

With the revolution, there was upward mobility for anyone who could organize profitable enterprises. The priority of the government was to serve this affluent class, while pretending to serve the interests of everyone.

Within this system workers won various rights over the years. However, because the government always supported capitalist interests, they resisted the demands of labor, as well as equal rights for women, Black people, Native Americans, and people who are gay.

So, when Wilkerson and many others argue that we might be loosing our so-called democracy because of President Donald Trump, we might ask the question: When was there ever a genuine democracy in the United States?

The seemingly invisible people consist of the working class of the world

Presidents Barrack Obama and Donald Trump both support policies to deport millions of people from this country. Why in the world would a working person support the idea of deporting a coworker? Just as Black people had the worst jobs here, today many of those jobs are being done by immigrant workers. 

The facts are that capitalists see the world as their nation. When President Trump recently travelled to China, some of the most powerful CEO's travelled with him. They didn't do this to improve the standard of living for working people here. No, they went to China in an attempt to profit off of the labor of our sister and brother Chinese workers. 

In fact, capitalists profit from the labor of workers all over the world. They use the immigration laws in a similar way as politicians used the Jim Crow laws to intimidate Black people from demanding higher wages.

Capitalists also support wars in order to dominate capitalists in other nations. President Trump ordered the military to kidnap Venezuela's President Nicolás Maduro. Then he ordered the military to go to war against the nation of Iran. These actions were about controling the flow of oil in the world. These actions were ultimately wars against the international working class. So, while the working class experiences the unimaginable horrors of war, capitalists use war to gouge out obscene amounts of money.

Empathy and solidarity

Isabel Wilkerson argues that the way to escape what she calls the caste system is through empathy. There is some truth in this statement. For the working class to advance, we need to be aware of the history and continued discrimination against Black people. 

There is absolutely no way the working class can advance unless we work to do away with all forms of discrimination. Wilkerson's work as well as books written by many others give us a clear view of the vicious discriminatory history of this country.

However, when we look at all the successful movements of the past, we see that they all had something in common. Those movements went beyond awareness of the injustices of this country. People came together in acts of solidarity. They began to understand that the only way for working people to make meaningful change is by organizing mass movements. 

Another weakness of Wilkerson's book is that she neglected to link the discriminatory policies and attitudes of this country to the decades long atrocities committed against Palestinians. Today millions of people are organizing all over the world to end the unimaginable genocide organized by the Israeli government.

Clearly we do not know what will happen in the future. However, when we look at the past, we see how mass movements have the potential to make significant change. As the capitalist system continues to fall apart, I believe the working class of the world has the potential to rebuild the world on new foundations.