"Fighting back for a Volksgemeinschaft"
At first, this note is ought to say that this writer bid greetings on the anniversary of the October Revolution. This occasion, which marks the rise of a society ran and led by the working class, was and is a nightmare for the established orders that even until today continues to resonate in every corner of the world.
Quite strange to some at first, especially that the Soviet Union was already gone decades ago; but to those who survive and remember would say that despite its shortcomings that revolution carried out by the working people many years ago initiated a new epoch in world history- no matter how those against slander or even dare to invade especially during the second world war. The Soviet Union that's been detested because of "Marxism Leninism" was the same Soviet Union that brought the world's first atomic power station, made the world's first batch of passenger jet planes and intercontinental ballistic rockets, and launched the world's first and second man-made earth satellites and a space station. It was also the same Soviet Union that preserved, rather than destroyed the palaces in Kremlin and the Churches of the tsarist past, the Bolshoi Ballet, the study of Pushkin's works, alongside the encouragement of Proletarian Culture and creative ideas all meant to forge a society for the working class.
However, this note isn't about commemorating that part of history but rather to rekindle that spirit behind that history especially in this time of "fighting" and "taking back the future." For in a way Gustav Mahler told that 'Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire', the revolutionary tradition brought by that October Revolution meant learning and understanding lessons that brought out of struggle not just to emancipate the working class and oppressed peoples but to pursue a development that's brought by social justice. That even those from the other side recognise how "fast" that development brought despite the issues of prison camps. The "speed" of development has created wonders in various forms, that altogether creates an outlook of the future those against has trying to deny.
***
That until today people would wonder about that alternative. Of course, both liberals and conservatives would dare to disagree a radical alternative to that capitalist status quo. One would claim about the frailties of man and the "beauty of nature" that cannot be altered. The question is, as humanity recognises its frailty, why not correct it? Nature is indeed beautiful, but why humanity under this capitalist order chose to exploit than to cherish it? But it is not surprising that from these orderists, be it the liberal or the conservative, has created radicals who chose to oppose them all because of the former two's defence of capitalism and instead demanding an alternative that today's liberals and conservatives cannot offer.
For with the agreements and organisations aligned with the maintaining of the neoliberal capitalist system, the intention of using the national economy as a gigantic profit-extraction operation including those of the transformation of the nation's agriculture and industry into a "colossal workshop" for international capital, has been a issue-especially in making the people into a labour force that can be easily disposed after their contracts expired, and its resources to be extracted but not for the people themselves.
In light of this development would say that their agenda brought about by these people meant betraying the nation and its yearning for development. Of course they would claim about development, but at what expense? Social justice? This reminds of one commentator that "working hard is enough and a few crumbs will fall down", another would claim that "wages are low but food is cheap", but how come despite seeing people working hard or even smart all for a pittance that same capitalism continues to create disparity and scarcity? For sure economists who tend to defend that economic system downplay about that statement-especially in a time when people are tired of that capitalist failure to do justice to the vital state and social interests of the people- that such realities has showed how capitalist perversion of "freedom" and "initiative" has decieved, betrayed the folk. Yes, that capitalism babbled by liberals and conservatives promised jobs, food, development for the future come as shown by their statements and achievements as shown in various outlets- but reality has shown otherwise with no security of tenures, pittance-level wages, rising cost of living, interest-seekers prevailing, of what is development and the future if it is not for the labouring folk?
This writer would say that both conservatism and liberalism indeed speak much of reform and innovation, of growth and retention as shown by Gladstone, Disraeli, or Hamilton; but by seeing the same two strands at the present together defending capitalism as promoting "development" according to Reagan, Thatcher, or even Tony Blair and Donald Trump, shows that both views, while seeing the flaws of the capitalist order chose to shrug in it- but instead talking about their distorted view on "freedom" while the people, tired by their market-centric views demand a new volksgemeinschaft.
And that volksgemeinschaft can be dismissed as "utopian" because it is "radical" especially when the folk sought to replace the compradore and the landlord, the corrupt bureaucrat and the lobbyist. At times both present-day liberals and conservatives would toy their thoughts by claiming they're against "oligarchs" but they can't replace outright the system for they benefited from it-instead talking about "expanding the pie" by letting outsiders to join in the fray of exploitation and calling it as "development"- the way they speak about production was replaced by "international finance capital" both liberals and conservatives also once detested. They would claim that they are for the country, but at the same time they preach about "smaller government" and "free trade".
Not also surprising that the economy according to theirs is a separate matter that only "experts" should deal with it- and that "experts" obviously, think about the market than the country and profit than the people. It is the same "experts" who, wished to replace the polis with the markets; of reducing democracy into a façade wherein people retaining their right to vote while decision making rests at the cabal of interest-seekers and exploiters. Wouldn't be surprised that they're also thinking that economics has its own world: almost separate from national affairs other than those of paying taxes and providing jobs. That the stock market is their homeland, the dollar is their religion, profit is their faith, the banks as their republic.
***
For sure there are those who disagree with that blunt statement knowing they all benefited from neoliberal capitalism. They would claim that "civic" or "cultural" nationalism as enough, that paying taxes and waving the flag is itself a "duty", if not downplay nationalism altogether as irrelevant and thing of the past; then if so, then how about capitalism? It is the same capitalism that diminishes love for kith and kin, of destroying heritage, of dismissing the future in favour of a warped "human factor" or a distorted version of "freedom" that justifies exploitation. It is unsurprising, especially when both present-day liberals and conservatives can't attack the very economic order supposed to be dismantled as such as in the past when they once detested.
And to think that both present-day conservatives and liberals tell tales about the frailties of humanity and the beauty of nature, responsibility and freedom, of social justice and noble duty, reality becomes otherwise- as these two sides of the coin dismissed their statements altogether in favour on one word: compromise, compromise with the prevailing social order no matter how evil it is. For sure nothing is wrong about compromise, but up to when? They would claim that there are some "changes" out of that compromise, but how come people remain dissatisfied? For sure they would say "there is no alternative" because these people are satisfied about today's order of things, that "globalised capitalism, so called free markets and free trade were the best ways to build wealth, distribute services and grow a society's economy. Deregulation's good, if not God." what more that some dare to accelerate further towards technological singularity reminiscent of Jack London using Ayn Rand for a gateway drug.
For now expect they're detesting that populist interlude despite the fact that they themselves as once populists who trying to put a folkish veneer on the existing order. Be it Trump, Biden, Duterte, or Robredo, Just like they talk about "freedom", "responsibility", "human factor", and other words enough to appease people, they would blame the oligarchs but not capitalism, they would blame the despotic landlords but not feudalism, they would criticise the first world leaders but not imperialism, but since reality goes like replacing the halls with markets and the desire for knowledge with crass materialism, what kind of future reality has talked about? Of course that ain't the volksgemeinschaft the masses desired of! Otherwise, that "volksgemeinschaft" if to be hijacked by the orderists rather destroys people and nation, culture and morals, violating the deepest levels of a community's being!
***
Regardless of denials and downplays, the events of 1917 and its succeeding actions around the world continue to resonate as the people demands a new volksgemeinschaft.
That as in the past, people will still demand for peace, land, bread, and justice as the prevailing order continues to exploit two and fro for the latter's interest. True that the world hath seen developments in various forms, thriving as one may say; but this doesn't escape the fact that the order remains as it was- and this time trying to reverse people's achievement in pursuit of an untrammeled capitalism as in the 19th century. But that attempts for reversal is responded by countless protests that shows how the vast mass of people strongly disagrees with the order’s attempt to reverse in pursuit of their interests- no matter how its apologists trying to appease their anger as such. It is unsurprising especially that when these orderists, by assuming both as "liberals" and "conservatives" trying to maintain their interests by claiming to be for "freedom", "conservation", "reform", enough to appease the growing people's tremor for these same words aside from “justice”.
