Social Classes — Necessary and Superfluous

[Javad]

This is an article by Friedrich Engels:

Social Classes — Necessary and Superfluous

In it, Engels explains how bourgeoisie is becoming a superfluous class which is not needed by society, just as "a territorial aristocracy was an unavoidable and necessary element of society" but became useless and turned into a parasite over time. While capitalism was necessary and progressive for some time in history, it has become a hinder for progress over time.

There was time when a capitalist was the employer and manager, but now, a modern capitalist never bothers to visit the factories or interfere with the production or service. He just sits and collects the profits. The only thing which interests him is moving his capital where the profits are the highest.

Those who actually manage the production are educated employees who are trained for their jobs. Even now, the worker class is managing the economy, although in favor of capitalists and with the purpose of maximizing their profits, in competition with other producers and without a central plan.

Removing capitalists from power may sound blasphemous, but only as much as removing feudal land lords or slavers from power sounded blasphemous long ago.

[RMNIXON]

How much 19th century ignorance should we tolerate?

The working class are today's educated investors and very much involved on the factory floor and the final product. I never knew Engels sounded so much like Charles Dickens, Oh mister Scrooge counting his money!

Did he ever create a job or run a single business I wonder?

[Ethereal]

Excluding capitalists who only acquired their wealth and position through purely nefarious means, capitalists who concern themselves primarily with collecting profits and moving capital around are performing a service every bit as skilled and as necessary as their educated employees. Or do you actually think allocating scarce capital in a way that maximizes profit does not require a specialized skill and knowledge of its own? If it were that easy, wouldn't everyone do it and collect the massive profits that it entails? Are we supposed to offended that they seek to maximize profits by allocating capital in a way that is most efficient? Profits are a signal from the market that the good or service on offer is useful and affordable. The problem with capitalism is not the capitalist per se, but the collusion between state power and capitalists, which is why it is necessary to strictly minimize state power, which, historically, has been the primary means through which capitalists abuse their position.

[Cotton1]

This is an article by Friedrich Engels:

Social Classes — Necessary and Superfluous

In it, Engels explains how bourgeoisie is becoming a superfluous class which is not needed by society, just as "a territorial aristocracy was an unavoidable and necessary element of society" but became useless and turned into a parasite over time. While capitalism was necessary and progressive for some time in history, it has become a hinder for progress over time.

There was time when a capitalist was the employer and manager, but now, a modern capitalist never bothers to visit the factories or interfere with the production or service. He just sits and collects the profits. The only thing which interests him is moving his capital where the profits are the highest.

Those who actually manage the production are educated employees who are trained for their jobs. Even now, the worker class is managing the economy, although in favor of capitalists and with the purpose of maximizing their profits, in competition with other producers and without a central plan.

Removing capitalists from power may sound blasphemous, but only as much as removing feudal land lords or slavers from power sounded blasphemous long ago.

Thank goodness for capitalists or those that were "educated and trained to do their jobs" wouldnt have a job to go to.

[Javad]

do you actually think allocating scarce capital in a way that maximizes profit does not require a specialized skill and knowledge of its own?

No, I believe that allocating capital in a way that maximizes profit requires specialized skill, but just as being a professional gambler or a thief requires specialized skill. Having that specialized skill doesn't make a gambler or thief anything more than a parasite for the society. Before capitalism, being a successful noble or slave owner who maximized his profits required specialized skill as well.

[US Conservative]

No, I believe that allocating capital in a way that maximizes profit requires specialized skill, but just as being a professional gambler or a thief requires specialized skill. Having that specialized skill doesn't make a gambler or thief anything more than a parasite for the society. Before capitalism, being a successful noble or slave owner who maximized his profits required specialized skill as well.

Not even Marx was a marxist.

Mail it to 1880's Germany.

And hierarchies exist for a reason. You think there aren't social classes in China and Venezuela?

Figure it out.

[Ethereal]

No, I believe that allocating capital in a way that maximizes profit requires specialized skill, but just as being a professional gambler or a thief requires specialized skill. Having that specialized skill doesn't make a gambler or thief anything more than a parasite for the society. Before capitalism, being a successful noble or slave owner who maximized his profits required specialized skill as well.

So investing capital in new computers as opposed to new fax machines is akin to thievery? Or the mere act of owning capital is thievery?

[Peter1469]

There is much to criticize Engels for, but let's focus on the bad analogy below:

This is an article by Friedrich Engels:

Social Classes — Necessary and Superfluous

In it, Engels explains how bourgeoisie is becoming a superfluous class which is not needed by society, just as "a territorial aristocracy was an unavoidable and necessary element of society" but became useless and turned into a parasite over time. While capitalism was necessary and progressive for some time in history, it has become a hinder for progress over time.

There was time when a capitalist was the employer and manager, but now, a modern capitalist never bothers to visit the factories or interfere with the production or service. He just sits and collects the profits. The only thing which interests him is moving his capital where the profits are the highest.

Those who actually manage the production are educated employees who are trained for their jobs. Even now, the worker class is managing the economy, although in favor of capitalists and with the purpose of maximizing their profits, in competition with other producers and without a central plan.

Removing capitalists from power may sound blasphemous, but only as much as removing feudal land lords or slavers from power sounded blasphemous long ago.

Feudal lords were not "removed" from power. Feudal lords were replaced by the nation-state as warfare became too expensive for feudal lords to handle.