What use is there of shareholders, lenders, ceos, and finaciers?
Why are they absolute when it comes to shutting down production, manipulating the MOP, and calling the shots?
What is the empirical evidence of their genius or their ability that… If they were too disappear; the whole of society would be left confused, blind, and inert?
I know we all say the truth that they really are just useless parasites. But genuinely more and more; the capitalist class is looking just as vestigial as royalty and aristocrats.
What is the point of them? Cause there MUST BE at least some material benefit to them at least a little… Right?
The only thing I can think of is that boards of directors seeves as a working model of what a high ranking vanguard may look like with all the trappings of material conditions and proletarian class based ideogly being the motive of success instead of profits.
Why does anyone tolerate this arraingment?
With this sentence I see why you are confused. You are imagining an impossible scenario, this is a utopian way of thinking. The ruling class will never vanish, because it needs to be repressed out of existence and rendered useless progressively under the dictatorship of the proletariat!
History advances slowly, reform of the whole system of production will take time because workers cannot rethink the whole system overnight. The morning after the bourgeois state is overthrown, people in the world will still go to work in their privately owned entreprises right? If the whole system is still untouched, they will need money, because we didn’t yet push an alternative, and this money will still be in the hands of the shareholders. Imagine how long it would be to replace the current currency system, when the previous is rooted so deep in every facet of everyone’s life. If the government make it illegal to be a shareholder overnight, imagine the confusion of every company that will just not know how to get the ressources, how to pay salaries and stuff. It takes time.
So yeah basically the capitalists are still here because things take time to change and they made themselves essential in the current system of production
This stuff is almost always just done by lower manager, logistics, payroll, hr, etc
But yes even then, in a hypothetical system, deleting the shareholders would lead to system facing severe system dysruption without additional modifications and changes to the system as a whole. But no one would make such a suggestion, nor would one be even feasible, and should this hypothetical “shareholders deletion” shouldn’t be considered as a realistic take on revolutionary theory
*Sprinkle in a little Marxist economics and lenin’s imperialism * But of course shareholding needs to be heavily reformed (this is a major avenue of wealth transfer from the proletariat to the bourgeoisie and also for monopolistic control over the means of production) and eventually completely abolished
My sentence must have been ambiguous, I was stressing the importance of the existing currency in supply chains. To take a simple example: a factory uses steel to make products, if they don’t have the money influx because shareholders are brutally forbidden they could be in a situation where the steel market is still here but they don’t have access to the monetary ressources that allow them to purchase from the steel market. To transition to socialism would mean organising a system of distribution of primary ressources that is not a market, I can imagine how complex it will be. And then we would have to organise every step of every supply chain of every industry. It’s a mind boggling problem, I’m confident we could make it eventually but only decades after the establishment of multiple socialist revolutions across the world