Common Veteran Delusions of Capitalism

Just as many of my Christian friends would rather go to church and listen to someone else tell them what is in the Bible rather than reading it for themselves, many of my fellow Veterans would rather let the media tell them what is in the Constitution rather than reading it themselves. All of us Veterans swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. So anything that would threaten the U.S. Constitution is something that pretty much every veteran stands against.

Rich politicians who have never served a day of their lives in the military but who grew up as trust fund babies with entrance into an Ivy League college being more of a family obligation than an actual opportunity to learn, will after taking over their dad's company tell veterans that Capitalism and the Constitution are one and the same. But nothing could be a bolder lie.

The U.S. Constitution does not explicitly use the term "private property" in a single, straightforward provision, but hedge fund managers, and defense contractor moguls will paint that link based on the Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment. Here's a breakdown:

The Fifth Amendment:

The Fifth Amendment includes a critical provision related to property rights through the Takings Clause, which states:

- "Nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

This clause guarantees that private property cannot be seized by the government for public use (e.g., for infrastructure projects like highways or schools) unless the government provides just compensation to the property owner. This is often referred to as eminent domain.

The Fifth Amendment does not explicitly state that individuals have a right to own property, it provides a constitutional protection against the government's arbitrary seizure of property and ensures that any taking is fair and compensated. But as a person who has actually had their home taken by eminent domain, I can assure you the government holds all the cards when assessing what fair compensation actually is.

The Fourteenth Amendment:

The Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified after the Civil War, further strengthens property protections in the Due Process Clause. It states:

- "No state shall... deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

This clause guarantees that property rights (along with life and liberty) cannot be taken away without due process. This provision applies to state governments, extending the protections of the Fifth Amendment's due process clause to the states. But again the government determines what due process is.

Article 1 and The Fourth Amendment:

Beyond this the constitution says nothing about any right to private property. Article 1, Section 10 talks about contract rights and the protection of property through the judicial system. And the Fourth Amendment guarantees the right of protection from unreasonable searches and seizures. This however is more about protecting the individual from law enforcement fishing expeditions to find a crime they can prosecute than it is about protecting the right to own property.

Implied Right of Protection

At the end of the day billionaires stretch logic to make the case that while the constitution does not guarantee a right to own private property it's "strongly" implied. But clearly the implication is weak at best. And when a rich developer wants to force the sale of some choice piece of property they have many times switched their tune to assert the right of eminent domain in order to meet their objectives.

Private Property vs Personal Property

The framers of the Constitution did not draw a distinction between private vs personal property. Clearly they cooked up the Constitution 80 or so years before Marx wrote his critical analysis of the contradictions inherent in capitalism. So the concept simply was not clear to them.

From a Marxist perspective private property is property that a person does not use themselves Instead it is property that they use in order to set up some form of rent collection, to take a piece of the value that others produce through their own efforts. This rent collection is parasitic, not symbiotic. The rent collector extracts from the renter, while not providing any value in return. This one sided exchange is considered by Marx to be exploitive.

When someone owns the tools and resources needed for a worker to produce value, and gives the worker a finite amount of money for the time and energy they put into using those tools, and resources (capital), into commodities, the owner of the capital is renting that capital out, and reaping the fruits of the workers labor.

While entrepreneurs often burn the midnight oil setting up systems of organization that allow the business to succeed in the dog eat dog world of capitalism to enable the efficient organization of labor into systems of socialized production that they can then extract value from, the entrepreneur doesn't usually have in mind the goal of running such a business forever. Each modern entrepreneur seeks ultimately to position themselves so that a management team (more labor), runs the business for them thus freeing the entrepreneur from the need to labor themselves.

I find it interesting that such people will toil in order to secure their freedom in a society that professes to guarantee the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness to all. Something seems off about that narrative. Is it possible that capitalism has actually stolen life liberty and the pursuit of happiness from the masses only to grant it to a tiny ruling class? Methinks that the answer is yes.

In a just and equitable society each persons freedom would need to respect the rights of others to exercise their freedom. So it's not absolute freedom in an Ayn Randian sense, it's a freedom that requires compromise and maybe from time to time a little collective sacrifice such as giving up a portion of the value you create, to help those who cannot.

The Christians call this charity. It's actually something the Bible encourages. In other cases it might be more of a tithe. In a world that does not share communist values, there will always be a need to defend the borders from those who would do harm to the people In a world where natural disasters exist, and disease and old age exist, we can either ignore the weak like a pack of senseless reptiles or care for them like humans, knowing full well that there but for the grace of god go I.

But in our world most live beneath the bonds of wage slavery, debt, and rent bondage. Many are worse off than that. Sleeping on the streets, and being told that their very existence as humans is a crime, as though being living breathing human beings who sleep, must eat, and must evacuate their bowels are a crime is a sin. Some rot in prison simply because they could not afford a decent lawyer and happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Their labor is literally slavery as defined in the 13th amendment.

This allows a tiny fragment of society to realize unimaginable freedom. Trump once said that he could kill a man in Times Square and nobody would do anything about it because he was rich. This is largely true. Rich people often get away with murder, or visits to Epstein's island. This tiny minority lives above the law because they own the law. This is not what the Constitution promises. But this is what capitalism delivers.

Communists want to Take Your Stuff

So the next thing billionaires tell kids when they want to get those kids to work for them, or join the military and die for them is that they need to fight communism in order to defend the constitution because communists want to steal your tooth brush. This conflation of personal property with private property is the lie that wars of conquest are made of.

Private property is what capitalists use to collect rents. Personal property is what people use for themselves either to sustain themselves or to produce goods and services. The home you own, the land you farm, the shop and tools you use to repair cars or fix dishwashers, those are your personal property. Communists want to make sure that everyone has enough personal and public property that they are FREE TO PURSUE LIFE, LIBERTY and HAPPINESS.

Private property by it's very nature ensures that most people have less and less personal property over time. Consider that China, Vietnam and Laos all of whom are run by communist parties, have a 90% or higher home ownership rate while the U.S. home ownership rate was 67% and is currently falling fast. Clearly the communists are outperforming the capitalists in securing the American dream for their people.

If anyone is coming to take your stuff then it's safe to say it's the capitalists, not the communists who want to take your stuff. Now if you are Elon Musk, or Donald Trump, or Bill Gates, or Warren Buffet then yes communists are coming to take your stuff. Because it's insane to defend a world where 1% of people own 90% of the stuff while 50% of the people must share 1% of the stuff. The bottom 50% are the ones doing most of the heavy lifting when it comes to producing and defending all that stuff.

It is important for veterans and active duty to understand that our Constitution is about securing the freedom and dignity of every person, not just a few rich old men and harpies. If you are going to kill and die at least try to make sure that it's worth the sacrifice.

What About the Rest of Capitalism?

Beyond saying a few things about very limited property rights the rest of what capitalism is has no basis in the Constitution. The Constitution says nothing for example about the idea that our society should be divided into two classes, owners and workers. Owners being those who control capital, and workers being those who trade time for barely enough money to live in many cases, and yield the product of their labor to the owners.

That is very much like the system of feudalism our country was founded to replace. If anything our Constitution is more anti-capitalist than capitalist in spite of the fact that it was drafted by a bunch of capitalists. But sometimes you have to promise things you have no intention of delivering in order to get elected I suppose. At least that is the case when what you intend to deliver is not something people would vote for if they had full disclosure.

All of that being said, veterans swore an oath to the promise, not the persons who made the promise. Veterans owe no loyalty to capitalists, even if they were the ones making promises they never intended to keep.

“Freedom in capitalist society always remains about the same as it was in ancient Greek republics: Freedom for slave owners.”― Vladimir Lenin

“Can a nation be free if it oppresses other nations? It cannot.”― Vladimir Lenin

“Only in community with others has each individual the means of cultivating his gifts in all directions; only in the community, therefore, is personal freedom possible.” ―Karl Marx

“Nemo resideo” => “No one left behind.” - USMC