in Esperanto
Chapter 4: SKETCH OF COMMUNIST SOCIETY -- ADMINISTRATION
In a communist society, even the state familiar to us will be abolished. Why is that, and how will a society without a state be administered?
1. It is possible to abolish state as a political entity.
1.1. Lamentation of Engels
Since a communist society is a society of social cooperation=mutual aid, the national authority that towers over us, governs us as citizens of a nation, and protects us will be abolished.
To get into the theory a little more, the abolition of the monetary economy discussed in the previous chapters means that from the perspective of the state, the sovereignty of the currency as the monopoly power to mint and issue the official currency to be used within the territory of the state is denied. Among national sovereignty, this currency sovereignty is the most important economic power alongside political territorial sovereignty, and its denial is almost synonymous with the abolition of the state.
However, conceptually, it is not impossible to imagine a "state without currency sovereignty". But it is just an empty notion, like a mobile phone without a battery.
Putting that aside, you might ask whether it is possible to abolish the state as a practical matter. In this regard, Marx's collaborator Engels also lamented that people are led from childhood to believe that the common affairs and interests of society cannot be managed without the state and its bureaucrats.
This kind of "state worship" has become even stronger today, as the nation-states that began to form in the western europe in the days of Marx and Engels have spread all over the world. It seems that the conviction that a state is essentially a benign institution and that we can only be happy when we become citizens of some nation- state is widely and deeply permeated among the masses.
However, are the citizens of the nation-state really such happy beings? In the following, let us take a more realistic look at the true state of the "citizens of the nation-state." It should be noted that here we do not assume a specific existing nation-state, but rather a modeled general state system.
1.2. Citizens as tax serfs
Today's nation-state is firmly tied to capitalism and plays the role of a political guarantor of capitalism. What is that nation-state?
It is a body of power that collects taxes, which today are mostly monetary taxes, from the inhabitants of a land called a territory. Therefore, while it is called a "nation-state," it actually collects taxes from foreigners residing in its territory.
On the other hand, the general rule is that foreigners are not guaranteed the right to vote because they are not citizens. Take what you take, but don't give what you give. No taxation without representation is an empty phrase as far as foreigners are concerned.*
*In reality, tax-free states also existed or exist. However, it is either a pre-modern private state that is privatized by a ruler such as a monarch and is operated by that private property, or a collectivist system in which the state controls production and distribution activities comprehensively as a total capitalist. In any case, it is nothing more than an anomaly for a modern nation.
Then, are citizens, who, in return for being taxed, graciously given the right to elect political representatives, have the full potential to decide how their tax money is spent?
In the first place, taxes are not limited-use donations, so once they are collected, the state can decide how to spend them. It can even be spent for nefarious purposes.
Even if such "misconduct" is unluckily discovered, the people involved are rarely punished severely. Insightful voters will probably recognize that checking the use of tax money through the exercise of the right to vote is nothing more than empty phrases.
Nevertheless, the nation-state binds its citizens to the legal framework of nationality, and confines them inside the tangible and intangible barbed wire called national borders. A nation-state, whether large or small, is like a gigantic human cage. It is also a stable device for the state to bind the people to the state for generations and make them the targets of tax-grabbing.
If we conclude so far, the nation-state may refute that it is the nation-state that grants nationality to the people and protects them within their borders. However, a nation that talks about "protecting the people" on a daily basis will easily abandon the people, especially when the existence of the nation is in danger. There are countless examples of such cases, both large and small, but we often see victims of disasters left unattended both at home and abroad, and it is not uncommon for people to be abandoned during wars, especially defeats.
Why would a nation-state abandon its people if necessary? The answer is simple. That is because the state is not an institution to protect its people, but a community of interest between tax-parasitic officials and politicians, and their biggest customers, the capitalists, that is, none other than the “committee in charge of the joint affairs of the whole bourgeoisie"(Marx).
In a word, the people of a country are tax serfs, and in that sense they are also the proletariat, whether rich or poor. However, since much of the proletariat today is wage earners, or wage serfs (including pensioners who were former wage serfs), this is where the formula "wage serfs≒tax serfs" holds true.
1.3. Citizens as soldier serfs
Nation-states that expropriate their people are also, almost without exception, sovereign states. What is that sovereign state?
It refers to nations that have exclusive territories and compete with each other over the territories themselves or the economic interests related to them. Since the ultimate conflict between nations is war, sovereign statss are also war states. Territory and sovereignty are the political-legal notions that together are the stakes of war.
With the establishment of a sovereign state system, the concept of nationality and national borders became more restrictive, so citizens needed the legal permission of the state even to take a step outside the country, and the people were more and more tightly bound to the cage called a sovereign state. This made it difficult for the people of each country to get to know each other, and even turned them against each other for the sake of the cause of "national interest." It facilitates warfare between nation-states.
In the event of a war, the nation would mobilize the nation as soldiers and engage in battle. People who do not become soldiers must also cooperate with the war at the home front. This so-called total war was only possible under the nation-state. The two world wars in the first half of the 20th century are the great results of this.
During the total war, the people are used by the state as soldier serfs, even if they are not slaves - although the position of the lowest level soldier can be seen in the bondage of slavery. Moreover, since most of the military funds invested in military forces and weapons as tools of war are taxpayers, there is an inevitability that a tax serf is also a soldier serf at the same time. Citizens will be forced to work in wars with the tax money they are forced to contribute.*
*In reality, there are countries that do not have armed forces. However, these countries are almost without exception small countries that are financially unable to maintain a permanent military force, and instead entrust their defense to large powers. By the way, although Japan is constitutionally declared not to have armed forces, it is a well-known fact internationally that it actually has de facto defense forces.
This kind of serdom is irrespective of whether the method of mobilizing soldiers is conscription or volunteers. Even under the volunteer system, the most dangerous front line soldiers are almost without exception young men from the working class, and the volunteer system even serves as a kind of unemployment countermeasure project. On the other hand, the tightly guarded high-ranking officials and generals of the ruling class will not be injured even in the event of a war, and they will be able to watch the battle on TV.
This is the solemn truth of "total war." However, human society has somewhat learned from the two great wars of the first half of the 20th century, which brought too tragic sacrifices to be glorified as total wars, and from the second half of the 20th century onwards, wars that fall under the category of total war has no longer occured.
However, as long as the nation-state=sovereign state system is maintained, no matter how much peace is disguised, it will only mean a temporary suspension of the state of war, and there will never be a conflict that will spark a war from the world. Local wars can and do occur anywhere at any time and it is actually occuring.
Moreover, as discussed in the final chapter, war is also a major business opportunity for the munitions industry. For this reason, they need to make large contributions to the political world to support their biggest customers, the sovereign states, and sometimes to get them to go to war.
