I recently read a bit of Marcuse and ended up agreeing with much of what he said: capitalism is a system of control where the highest goal is to keep the system afloat and to have absolutely everything bend to its will. We all serve this alien machinery that defines us and in a way energy flows from upwards down instead of downwards up. Absolutely everyone is defined and oppressed by capitalism, not only the working class. We are given false needs and these needs define our identity. This is a form of alienation that goes beyond what Marx described: not only are we alienated from the fruits of our labor but also from our very selves. There is no alternative to capitalism: it is impossible to form any kind of counter-culture community without having the capitalist machinery either destroy it or convert it back into the mainstream. True liberty doesn't exist, only a false sense of liberty: if you follow the mainstream and play according to the rules of the system, you can become wealthy and powerful and live according to your own terms henceforth. But this isn't true liberty now, is it?

The connection I made in my mind is that maybe Christianity wasn't replaced by socialism, communism or anarchism, but by capitalism. Capitalism is what prevents self-actualization. It tells us to forget about our dreams and aspirations and to work and submit to the system in the hopes that we will eventually get some kind of freedom, wealth and power. Capitalism oppresses us, our real selves, and forces us to bend to the will of a new God, Capital. We dutifully serve this machinery and the luxury that it promises like some kind of divine order. And those who are rich, even middle class, want nothing else. They are the last men satisfied and content with what they have, and they don't care for any alternative. So capitalism prevents self-realization by praising some higher principle than life itself, just like Christianity.

Moreover, capitalism is inherently reactionary: bourgeois morality was a reaction to aristocratic morality. The bourgeois were jealous of the aristocrats because they were born into wealth and didn't have to work for it, and that's why the bourgeois value hard work and despise laziness and leisure. They value work so much that we live in a world where everyone must burn themselves out and slavishly serve some system just so that they can consider themselves valuable. If someone wants to spend their lives creating for themselves and serving their own interests, they are considered lazy and despicable: we must always serve the market and generate capital, and if we are not capable of doing so, or if we don't care to do so, we are inherently worthless human beings. The leisurely lifestyle of the aristocrat, especially the superfluous man, and the ideal of free and comfortable creative activity, pursuing art, science and philosophy for its own sake, is seen as worthless. Capitalists mainly critique socialism, communism and anarchy for inspiring laziness, however, whenever I speak to any Marxist or the like, they all seem to value the aristocratic ideal of leisurely work and not any type of idle passivity.

It seems like capitalist morality stems from hate, jealousy, and a sort of wild neurosis. I would be interested to see what any of you think about this topic.