The Fate of Capitalist Nations: America and Britain Have Lost Important Battles but Maybe Losing the War IS Not Yet Clear

There are three 'logical' endpoints that are debatably inevitable for a capitalist nation. One, the logical endpoint of historical colonization is currently exampled by America, Britain, France and Germany who are experiencing the consequences of foreign population flow-back from colonized markets to the colonizer because the colonizer became dependent on cheap labor to 'man' the low wage, but essential, manual and service jobs at the bottom of the economic pyramid. (Rome saw this happen.)

All of these top-of-the-pyramid nations have discovered that it is difficult or impossible to control the back-flow of cheap labor from exploited, foreign labor markets to the homeland exploiter. Thus, despite the immediate historical profits from exploited foreign markets, eventually there have come high social and as well economic costs to the exploiting homelands -created by cultural-linguistic incompatibilities prolonged and strengthened by segregation, needed health services, and education and skills gaps in general.

The problems to the home country of adapting foreign market population back-flow, are exacerbated by a kind of problem-solving paralysis deriving from the homeland's need to 'obey' democratic-philosophic principles that dictate costly humane solutions when the directness of behavior as in the foreign exploited markets would be more efficient, i.e., less costly, less humane and quicker actions. This built in self-paralysis has made it impossible control foreign market population back-flow both legally through immigration laws or via natural blocks such oceans and artificial blocks like walls.

But mostly making it resistive to control foreign population back-flow are the strong pressures and rewards for illegal immigration by the needs to fill low paid domestic service jobs (in hotels, restaurants, private homes, health clinics, etc) and likewise in low wage roles in industries such as the agri-business sector.

The major former colonizers are now less 'whip and chain' masters but still exploitive colonizers!

Overall, the former colonial 'masters, have found it difficult or impossible to control (much less to block) back-flow of native populations for at least two reasons:

One, refusal of immigration from exploited markets violates the democratic principle of 'fairness and equality' that
is shared by these nations.

Two, and perhaps the most important problem for the homeland, the internalizing by foreign populations of the same
democratic self-identity badges that unify (and help to pacify) the home land populations.

Once foreign, cheap labor begin to internalize the same narrative used to keep domestic populations in check, 'whip and chain' controls become unsustainable in the same way as narrated and revered in the history of the homelands.

This self-contradiction of messaging constitutes a built-in self-destruction button at the breast of the colonizer and is the core reason for the historical and current fragility of the colonizer-colonized relationship. And, this fragility increases as countervailing forces develop against exploitative capitalism as international ethical standards evolve (to the dismay of the capitalist).

In a perfect capitalist world of free, unregulated and ethically unhindered markets, the logical endpoint is concentration of all wealth and assets at the upper stratum, the 1 percent. (This is the free-market, finite-sum game-theoretical model of successful business management that is the guide and goal for every hungry, aggressive capitalist.. no mater how strong a protest.

But in a real world, such total concentration of wealth and the efforts to achieve that goal, are guaranteed to create social resistance and eventually lead to a path ending in society's self-destruction.

We seem now arrived at the logical endpoints of free market capitalism with disruptive consequences of a perceived scarcity of 'Goods' at lower economic strata mainly exampled by a scarcity of employment income presumed by competition in a zero-sum economy from illegal immigration.

Our economy is not a zero-sum situation but where did this perception come from? That is a question to be secondarily answered perhaps, along the way to thinking up and planning for new industries and subsidizing new, spring-board technologies.

Never the less, our society's 'Hoi Polloi' have become disaffected as there is no longer a frame of reference where they are 'superior' to a social stratum below themselves thus removing the intangible but crucial ego support (a virtuality paycheck) that makes their own poverty palatable.

The capitalist knows this and through influencing government (lobbying) has constructed complex systems of social codes and strata-segregation rules and laws to appease the lower masses and thus imprison them in their own, ego sustained world of false, prejudicial rewards - artificial (intangible) wealth that 'buys' nothing and doesn't compete with the capitalist who is busy accumulating real wealth.

The third consequence of a free-market capitalist society is that the wealthiest capitalist is seen as the most eligible to govern; but this is a fallacy because the most successful capitalist is by definition the most focused on maximizing the bottom line, P&L, which requires the most effort to distance oneself from emotions linked to people and society (and even national loyalties).

Thus, the most successful capitalist, operating from the pure business model, is by definition the least suited for, and capable of, husbanding the 'Common Good'. G

Good historical examples of pure free market capitalists are current cultural heroes, Pirates of the Caribbean, Black Beard and kin. The most successful capitalist is the most vicious pirate, the most blood thirsty jungle predator desirous of a world of unregulated commerce and business operation where 'business' has the pure objective to make wealth without being weighed down by any societal considerations, even consumer safety and benefit except as unintended fall-out (eg, "Trickle Down"). The mindset of the capitalist must be the accumulation of ALL wealth, motivated by the anxiety of viewing the economic world as a finite, zero-sum game.

In this context, as examples, both Trump and Romney are 'successful' , or at least 'worthy' businessmen although they collectively accumulated wealth by treasonous and corporate-cannibalistic 'just business' behavior. In their business life, and certainly Trump in his personal life, both followed societally destructive paths that endangered jobs and national security.

One might say (certainly this commenter can say it) that any nation that calls itself a 'democracy' should exclude these gentlemen, and their brethren, as candidates for top governance positions.

But admittedly, such exclusion, which is beneficial to protecting the Common Good is by definition difficult,inadvisable or impossible in a democracy … especially once the capitalist has succeeded in legally redefining capitalist elements such as corporations from bloodless, paper-boundaried legal structures to personhood with the same rights as flesh and bone people, (viz,. Citizens United).

The result of such dilution of a nation's democratic principles will inevitably be, as it is now become in both the cases of Britain and America, a chaotic, dysfunctional, internally disturbed, directionless and self-destroying state (State)... even without the aid of an external enemy.

This vulnerability makes it easier for an intervention by an external enemy through bullet-less means (unconventional warfare). Both Britain and America are experiencing and losing, subtly-fought unconventional warfare with similar outcomes - social and political self-disruption without enemy boots setting foot. Such is the fate of former, and current colonizers who perfected empirical foot-ship-and-air armies.

In the cases of both America and Britain, the common unconventional 'weapon' used to invade and conquer them has been Russia's legal use of social media (capitalist uber-products) to 'capture-and-manipulate' the minds, i.e., voting preferences, of homeland populations. Russia's weapon of choice was through contracting services from Cambridge Analytical (an internet data corporation) to accumulate and exploit web-user data. These were successful projects as demonstrated by the election of Donald Trump (with his announced goal of possible exiting from NATO), and Britain's Prime Minister May's intent, at all costs, of exiting the European Union ('BREXIT'). Both objectives successes have brought along wild social and political tides and involved direct treason , through the Trump-Putin 'collaboration'. In both cases, these two colonizer homelands (Britain and America) were caught unprepared for unconventional, bullet-less warfare. More, they were blind to the fact they were even at 'war' involving Russia's 'soft' weans such as cyber data 'bullets' and treason hidden in the weeds of the global market and electronic banking systems.