civilizations which have hitherto existed have been overturned by the
same cause. “_Latifundia_,” said Pliny, “_perdiderunt Romam_.”
This same economic system exists in all the great countries of the
world save Russia, where it broke down under the Czarist régime and has
not been re-established. It is farther advanced in the countries of
the old world than it is here, because this country is more recently
settled. This fact constitutes the only difference between the economic
order in the old world and that in the new--a difference in the degree
that exploitation has reached.
Wherever exploitation exists, whether in the new world or the old, it
exists by means of a governmental organization which its beneficiaries
control and use to protect their privileges against the expropriated
and exploited masses. There is general agreement among scholars that in
government, exploitation came first, and what we know as law and order
are its incidental by-products; and that however far the development
of these by-products may go, they are never allowed to interfere with
exploitation. “The State,” says Oppenheimer, “grew from the subjugation
of one group of men by another. Its basic justification, its _raison
d’être_, was and is the economic exploitation of those subjugated.”
Both the origin and the essential nature of the State remain perfectly
clear so long as the conquering class remains distinct from the subject
classes and keeps these in a state of vassalage, without freedom of
movement, and subject to transfer from one owner to another along with
the land on which they dwell. In our own age, they are quite evident
in the dealings of the Western powers with weak peoples, as in India
or the Philippine Islands, or the mandated territories under the
League of Nations, where foreign Governments, through their military
organizations, protect their nationals in an economic exploitation of
the native population, and themselves levy taxes upon the natives to
pay the costs of the process. The nature and purpose of the State are
clear, indeed, in any community where the owning and exploiting class
exercises direct control over the propertyless dependent classes
as more or less chattels. The landed aristocracy of Europe formerly
exercised this direct control, as their titles, now grown meaningless,
indicate.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account