Does human exploitation save the economy?

Capitalist economic structures are systematically dualistic; they consist of the wealthy and the poor! The discourse of a "middle class" is not a feature of pure capitalism, but rather a temporary condition in capitalist fabrics where social policies have been genetically modified. Indeed, as neoliberal policies lead to a return to pure capitalism, almost every country, whether advanced or developing, shows a tendency toward this typical dual structure. The formula of Paul Samuelson, one of the leaders of mainstream economic doctrine, for real capitalism is expressed in this pithy phrase(!): mild unemployment and mild inflation are essential for economic functioning or progress. What this gentleman said is actually a description of a social structure. That is to say, in capitalist societies, it is not the human being but capital that is dominant, and capital feeds and grows its own structure not by providing happiness to humans, but by exploiting them. What the late master Samuelson did not add to his statement for the sake of advertising the system is that while capital is constantly growing, "Every capital, as its own gravediggers, is doomed to be ruined by a crisis one day!"

Why am I here today with such a heart-wrenching topic? Isn't the reason quite clear? Workers are up in arms, retirees are up in arms, tradesmen are up in arms, and even small capital cannot save itself; it is also up in arms! It seems that the capital segment that drives society and all the segments that have entered into production with it are crying out on ground that is slipping from under their feet. However, what is interesting is that while society is up in arms, the government, which has been in power for over twenty years, is not only far from being on its feet despite all signs of exhaustion, but is also attempting to change the constitution. For this reason, I tried to pen such an article today to examine our issues from this perspective. If I cannot finish the article properly today, we can continue our conversation next week.

It is absurd to see Samuelson's statement as a complete exploitation model at first glance, because the capitalist production model is essentially a monument to exploitation. Let us now examine the relationship between the exploitation of labor and the master Samuelson's pithy phrase(!) in this context. First, let's look at the issue of mild unemployment. Once, as the true master Marx pointed out with the term 'reserve army of labor,' unemployment is necessary so that workers do not become too insolent in their wage demands and behave with more decorum! However, excessive unemployment is also harmful to the system, because excessive unemployment both disturbs society and prevents the satisfaction of capital's desire to realize surplus value by weakening purchasing power in the domestic market.

As for mild inflation; since inflation weakens the purchasing power of money, and therefore wages, it reflects as a money illusion for the worker and as an increase in profit/gain for the boss. That is, in an environment where there are wage increases, workers and the public in general experience a money illusion. In other words, a worker or a citizen whose wages or income increases falls under the delusion that their situation has improved and perceives a relative enrichment, and they become happy. However, when the income or wage increase is met with inflation, the purchasing power of money has decreased, so it is not enrichment but impoverishment that is experienced. Even if the income or wage increase provided is at the rate of inflation, it does not create enrichment for the individual, but only serves to maintain the previous level of purchasing power. In short, inflation can act as a very important financial deceiver between the worker and the boss, between the public and the government, benefiting the boss and providing budgetary convenience to the government. While mild inflation widens the gap between the actual monetary wage received and the purchasing power of that wage to the detriment of labor and the benefit of the boss, high inflation also hits the boss. Therefore, one should not go to extremes in either unemployment or inflation so that business can continue without disturbing social peace.

In Turkey, despite all the suppression by TÜİK (Turkish Statistical Institute), we are experiencing extraordinary inflation. Conversely, neither the wages of workers, nor the incomes of retirees, nor the incomes of the general public are increasing at the same rate. The net meaning of such a process is that the economic difficulties created by the growing capital and the enrichment of a certain segment are being dumped onto those with narrow and fixed incomes.

So, how is it that the political cadre can get more or less enough votes from the public? When we look at the general appearance of current politics, the system is being maintained in an environment where justice, academia, educational institutions, and the media are suppressed, and where parliament is practically not allowed to function through the suppression of the opposition. It can be said that the general public does not have a direct or frequent connection with the justice mechanism. When we look at academia, as a natural result of the party-state, this time, while an attempt is being made to create a party academy tasked with acting as a silencer in the entire institution, a state of complete peaceful silence prevails in academia to avoid being left out of the cadre or facing arbitrary dismissal. Our youth, on the other hand, are consuming their tomorrow with a love for phones or TikTok buffoonery.

Well, if I need to explain what I want to say to conclude the article, without casting aspersions on anyone or any institution, it must be made clear that governing is not the skill of ensuring the continuation of power by sweet-talking the public or by lulling them to sleep with religiousness, reactionism, and ignorance. Governing is not the skill of masking the country's being thrown into the shackles of exploitation on behalf of backward industry internally and imperialists externally by seizing the state during the term of power. Yes, these are also services in their technical aspects, but they are not uplifting for the public; they are destructive. True service to the public is not creating an environment of poverty, leaving the masses in need of a penny, and buying votes through the party. Now the question is this: is such a shaped way of governing a requirement of capitalism, or is it a way of "eating yogurt" (a Turkish idiom for "a way of doing things") of a specific political philosophy reflected in management? To discuss this topic, goodbye, dear friends.