Rob Abiera

Fascism preserves capitalism? That's quite a trick, considering fascism subordinates private property, production, wages, investment, and trade to the authority of the state. Capitalism rests on individual rights, private property, and voluntary exchange. Fascism rejects individual rights whenever they conflict with the state's objectives. Communism abolishes private ownership of the means of production. Fascism permits nominal private ownership while subordinating its use to political authority. Both reject the individual's right to exist for his own sake. Calling fascism capitalism doesn't establish a connection. It merely demonstrates how convenient it is to condemn an economic system without defining it.

Name one? How about a few? Rockefeller lowered the cost of kerosene through efficient refining and distribution. Ford made automobiles affordable through mass production. Carnegie reduced steel production costs through industrial innovation. Walton lowered retail prices through bulk purchasing and efficient logistics. Dell made computers cheaper by eliminating retail intermediaries. Kamprad made furniture affordable through flat-pack manufacturing and distribution. Bezos intensified retail competition through Amazon. Koum made international messaging practically free through WhatsApp. Page and Brin made search, navigation, email, and translation available without direct charges. And that's barely scratching the surface. In fact, it would be considerably more challenging to find a billionaire who earned their fortune through voluntary trade without lowering costs, improving quality, increasing productivity, or making something more accessible. That's how fortunes are generally made in competitive markets. You create value for others, and the more people you serve, the greater your potential reward. You don't even have to buy from these businesses to benefit. Their competitors must improve their offerings or risk losing customers. These clout chasers destroy their credibility daily without so much as flinching. They enjoy the accumulated benefits of capitalist innovation while confidently demanding evidence that any of it ever happened. The economic illiteracy would be impressive if it weren't so commonplace.

You also have the choice to start your own company. Something I'd expect to be relatively easy for a movement claiming to represent the working class while aspiring to own the means of production. Pool your resources, establish worker-owned businesses, compete, and demonstrate the superiority of your model. Capitalism permits all of it. You don't need a revolution, permission from billionaires, or the confiscation of anyone else's property. You don't even have to care what billionaires are doing. You choose to make their wealth your obsession. Instead of demonstrating what you can create, you spend your time demanding control over what others have created. For a movement supposedly devoted to liberating workers, you seem remarkably determined to remain dependent on the people you despise.