Marx correctly identified capital as extractive. His solution was collective ownership, with the state as a temporary bridge. Every implementation saw the bridge become permanent. The party became the new extractive class.

Libertarianism correctly identifies that institutions are extractive. Its solution: strip them away and let markets sort it out. Each one correctly diagnoses a disease, then prescribes a cure that causes the same disease.

2/9

Because both models miss the deeper pattern. It's not capital or government that's the problem. It's power asymmetry and power asymmetries are convertible. Eliminate economic power and political power expands to fill the gap. Eliminate political power and economic power does the same.

3/9

What other kinds of extraction do both miss? Kinship networks. The Soviet nomenklatura extracted through party connections. Silicon Valley extracts through founder-class access. Ibn Khaldun documented this in the 14th century: the cohesive in-group always extracts from everyone outside it.

4/9

Informational asymmetry. Sumerian priests controlled literacy and therefore controlled surplus. Medieval guilds hoarded trade secrets. Modern finance extracts through complexity regulators can't parse. Communism assumes state planners will be benevolent with their knowledge advantage. Libertarianism assumes markets make information transparent.

5/9

Ecological extraction is stealing from the future. Externalizing costs onto people who don't exist yet and can't fight back. Soviet industrialization and unregulated capitalism have both been catastrophic here. Neither model has a mechanism to represent future populations. The extraction just changes who gets the bill.

6/9

Religious and ideological extraction. Tithes under feudalism. Enforced conformity under state atheism. Prosperity gospel under capitalism. Control over meaning and legitimacy is a form of power, and it generates extraction under every economic system we've tried.

7/9