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

I should explain how assymetries are "convertible."

A tech founder has informational power (a proprietary algorithm). That converts to economic power (market dominance, stock price). Economic power converts to political power (lobbying, regulatory capture). Political power converts back to economic power (favorable legislation, weakened antitrust). The cycle completes.

The point is that if you eliminate one type of power, such as abolishing private capital, the people who still hold other forms of power (political connections, social networks, information access, capacity for violence) can convert those into whatever replaces capital. The extraction continues through a different channel.

We cannot fight a pattern we don't learn to recognize.