Doesn’t that sound laissez unfair?

Saturday, October 19th, 2019

The March of History pits Mises vs. Marx in a Hamilton-esque rap battle:

Workers of the world — ASSEMBLE!
It’s time for the ruling classes to tremble.
I’m the people’s hero, the MVP:
M – A – R – X! Yeah, you know me!

Let’s go back to when men were free.
We hunted and gathered communally.
But get ready, ’cause here comes the twist,
A villain appears, called a “capitalist”.

He puts the proletariat — that’s US — in chains,
exploits our labor, and pockets the gains.
Though slick ads he trick lads and ladies in kind,
selling fake needs he poisons our hearts and minds.

He rots our soul through alienation
pursuing limitless accumulation.
He works us into an early grave,
through debt, steals back the money we save.

Greed is the gospel! Profit? GOD.
The rich get richer through graft and fraud.
The poor get poorer, but YOU don’t care.
Doesn’t that sound laissez unfair?

200 years I’ve been singing this song,
Now my chorus is 99% strong.
The revolution’s here. It’s time to repent.
Your moment is over — your capital’s SPENT!


  1. Gaikokumaniakku says:

    Marx was very much a “gangsta” when he raped maidservants who couldn’t fight back.

  2. Kirk says:

    Did we really expect better from the founding father of leftism…?

    There’s a reason so many of the men on the left are rapists and exploiters of women; that’s where the women are. Socialism/Marxism is a uniquely attractive idea to women, who want to be cared for. And, like working with children attracts pedophiles, these ideologies attract exploiters who facilely ape the ideals, and then use the access to get at the women when they’re trusting and vulnerable.

    This is why you see so many scumbags on the left. One, they don’t really believe in the principles they espouse, and two, they’re there like lions feeding on the easy prey that’s come down to the water hole.

    Hell, doubt me? Look at the biggies like Mao. Dude was a sexual abuser for the ages, just like most of them.

    I honestly can’t think of a single ascetic figure from the history of Socialism or anywhere on the left. None. There are a couple of religious figures, but even those, like Gandhi, had their convoluted little perversities. Gandhi, who liked to sleep naked with his teenage nieces… SMH.

  3. Lucklucky says:

    Marxism appears to be an absolutist reaction to modernity. It is ironic that Marxism replaces the Ancien Régime with something even more Absolutist and with even less check and balances.

    It is a return to an even more primitive conception of power. Primitivism to con intellectuals.

    The power that it offers is not surprising that attracts very bad people.

  4. Kirk says:


    I don’t think it is at all accidental.

    Marxism may have been conceived as an ideal, but it was rapidly taken up as something quite different than it was conceived as.

    Note the way the Soviets aped the nobility; all that they did was replace them with a new nomenklatura, precisely as every socialist revolution has done. It is the mere replacement of one exploiter with another–Look at Venezuela, and how Chavez has a daughter who is the wealthiest woman in Venezuela if not the entire continent of South America.

    You have to analyze Marxism and Socialism not as political ideologies, but cons. Massive, massive con games, which end in the bust-out of whatever legitimate nation-state that they can overtake. The criminal class is brought within the Revolution, then take it over, hollow it out, and turn it all to their own benefit. Lenin begat Stalin, and Stalin was merely a more effective criminal. It’s why most of these “revolutionary movements” start out as organized criminal enterprises, and end as entrenched aristocracies like the one in China. Even today, the new nobility of the former Soviet Union have benefits, being the ones who became the looters of the stolen public property underlying their fortunes.

    Don’t analyze Marxism, Socialism, or the Democratic Party as political movements. Instead, examine them in terms of confidence games and criminal enterprises. It renders things with a lot more clarity.

  5. Sam J. says:

    In my opinion they’re both extreme positions and we’re not stuck with choosing just the two no matter how many times they tell us it’s so with their big blathering psychobabble propaganda horn.

    Marxism sucks but so does monopolist financial Capitalism. Financial Capitalism may be even worse at the extremes.

    Marxism at least is supposed to treat all people well, whether it does or not is a different matter, but the aim is to do people good. Financial Capitalism doesn’t even pretend to treat people well it only cares about profits.

Leave a Reply