elimination

It feels good to be back with Bump Nose’s group. I belong here. He seems to have recovered from yesterday’s bout of depression. He sits at his desk entirely absorbed by something he is reading on his tablet. 14, 12, Tight Rope and Switch sit in their usual places similarly focused on their academic pursuits. Nothing in their eyes alludes to any of the events that have transpired, my hallucination, their close run-ins with the smoke. It’s all commonplace; just another day in paradise.

I look up from my work entirely unnoticed and begin to wonder if it was all some wild hallucination. The only thing that grounds me to reality is a thin film of black under each fingernail. So far I have read excerpts from Adam Smith’s “Inquiry Into The Nature and Causes of The Wealth of Nations,” in addition to other works on capitalism. Our textbook describes the weaknesses exhibited in capitalist systems such as England in the 1800s and America in the 20th century and how these systems eventually failed. It’s fascinating and resurrects a familiar passion and curiosity that I thought had long been coughed out of me.

“Capitalism is defined as an economic and political system in which a country’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. The Laissez-faire policy of free trade and capitalism’s philosophy of economic freedom are said to yield great economic success and industrial power. The most prominent flaw in this system can be seen in the constant rises and falls of a perpetually teetering economy. In addition, it is noted that in true capitalism worker exploitation is inevitable and when the oppression of employees and an economic recession fall in junction the topple of the system becomes a near certain.”

I have also read through the entire communist manifesto in addition to works on socialism from the French idealists of the early 1800s, notably Henri de Saint-Simon, Pierre Proudhon, Louis Blanc and Charles Fourier.

“Socialism was a political and economic theory of social organization in which production, distribution and exchange were owned by the community. Communism, being the extreme of this, is defined as a political theory derived from Karl Marx advocating for a society where all property is publicly owned and each person works and in turn is payed in correspondence to their abilities and needs.”

Interestingly enough both socialism and capitalism are condemned. The textbook claims that both are good ideas on paper, yet too susceptible to corruption via human weakness to be realistic for implementation. I find the testaments of early socialist thought to be especially fascinating. Henri de Saint-Simon argued that the world was composed of “doers” (leading scientists, engineers and industrialists) and “parasites” (lawyers, the court, the churchmen and the aristocracy). The “parasites” would eventually give way to the doers who would guide economy, vast public works projects and investment banks creating a more prosperous social organization. He also argued that all public works projects should serve the interests of the poor. Pierre Proudhon similarly argued in his work “What is Property?” that property is theft, and that all profit is stolen from the worker who is the source of all wealth.

In “Organization of Work” Louis Blanc advocated for universal male suffrage (this was long before women’s suffrage) and for a peaceful worker takeover. This was both similar to and different from Marx, who advocated for the workers of the world to violently unite against the oppression of the upper classes. Blanc pushed for government set up workshops in order to preserve the “right to work.” Most fascinating was Charles Fourier who somehow worked out that the ideal utopian society was 6020 people living on 5,000 acres of land. The textbook defined a utopia as a state in which everything is perfect or a state that actively aspires to perfection. I suppose in a way I live in a utopia.

Fourier continued to advocate for the total emancipation of women, abolition of marriage and free unions based only on “love.” He claimed that marriage was prostitution and that young women were “sold” to their husbands for dowries and other financial considerations. His ideas were widely condemned by his contemporaries and further condemned by our textbook in reference to reducing societal checks on population growth and certain “disciplinary”ideals closely tied to unregulated dopamine. Something about the Greater Purpose is also thrown in there at the end contributing faux credibility. I shoot my tablet a dirty look, it doesn’t seem to respond. It remains in smug recognition of its painfully frustrating ambiguity. In a world of so much analytical fact, so little seems to be actually based in fact. Or if it is, we don’t have the privilege of knowing all of them. I hear a tiny swish in the air as 12′s hand shoots up unnoticed.

After a good five minutes of being ignored by Bump Nose, who obviously sees her waving hand in his peripheral vision, 12 begins to obnoxiously clear her throat. Eventually, Bump Nose looks up with a veiled smirk. “Something you would like to say, Title 12?” I burst into silent giggles that I wipe away with a subtle hand over my lips. On either side of me the twinkling eyes of 14 and Switch return my expression. 12 clears her throat once more before speaking, sending us all into further waves of giggles silenced by Bump Nose’s failed attempt to shoot us an authoritative glare. Finally 12 begins to speak. “Can you please tell us exactly what is wrong with sexual freedom as advocated by Charles Fourier in terms of “disciplinary ideals”? I don’t entirely understand.” Bump Nose momentarily stares blankly at 12 all “system does not compute.”

14 bursts out laughing, I give him a kick in the shin which he returns while Bump Nose looks out into the distance pensively. I begin to wonder if he has been turned to stone by 12′s most unprecedented inquiry when finally he begins as to speak. “Well in the context of modern technology absolutely nothing.” 12′s eyebrows look confused. The rest of us eagerly lean forward in our desks, all eyes on her. She continues to speak, “I’m sorry, but I don’t understand, the text said the opposite.” Bump Nose looks pensive for a moment his index finger curled beneath his nose has his head rests on his left forearm. His eyes grow momentarily as he is struck with a new thought. “Who writes your textbooks 12?” 12 stares at him as though her entire perception of the world has just exploded. Looking taken aback she quietly responds. “I don’t know.”

Bump Nose continues to speak. “You are absolutely correct 12, you don’t know, so how can you claim the infallibility of the unknown? You can’t.” Curiosity and fascination spreads through the room as we lean in further against our teetering desks to hear Bump Nose’s words. For a second I fear that this all is an awful trick and he is done speaking, leaving his ideas uncooked and full of harmful pathogens, yet thankfully he reads our faces and resumes speaking. “Remember children, bias is always present: Even the most objective dissertation is tainted by emotion, the experience and the identity of its author.”

12′s hand shoots up again. “Yes 12,” he says with a perhaps slightly uncomfortable smile. “Can you tell us who wrote this, and why they so vehemently condemned weakness without due cause?” Bump Nose’s expression turns sour as I begin to hold my breath.

“I can’t tell you that 12,” he says softly, “perhaps one day you will know.” Level Three. Everyone’s internal dialogue whispers those two words so loudly that you can almost hear them ringing through the air. “I can tell you this, however.” Our ears perk up. “The person who wrote this, is not entirely wrong. She is not entirely right either.” She. Bump Nose turns his head suddenly and continues,. “You may go.” As we begin to silently shuffle out the door I look back at him as he stares out the window a frown crossing his lips.

I know I ought not to push my luck, but I can’t leave until I ask one more question. “What is our current economic system?” Bump Nose seems pleasantly surprised by the simplicity of my question. He reflects for a moment. “For perhaps the first time in human history there is no economic system, or perhaps this could be called a variation on communism.” I nod and smile. “Thank you.”