Blueprint for a Capitalist Revolution
The core assumption of Marxists is the existence of, at root, two classes: the productive class
and the parasitical class. Revolution, in Marx's actual writings, was understood to be inevitable,
since with increasingly concentrating wealth, the proletarians would so outnumber the
"Capitalists" at some point that they could not help but take back what was rightfully theirs.

The development of the middle class, ubiquitous in the industrialized world, and very
disconcerting for the ideological dogmatists, prevented that concentration of wealth.

But in some respects, Marx was right. To be sure, free markets have worked extremely well.
The sheer quantity of innovation and following output unleashed with relative economic
freedom have worked to raise even average Americans to levels of opulence that would have
been unheard of a mere 100 years ago.

At the same time, though, we DO have concentrations of wealth that warrant explaining. It is
my personal belief that there are a handful of de facto Trillionaires out there, and certainly we
have seen a gradual shift in our economy from industrial production to finance.

My contention, argued in the treatise linked on the picture below, is that the actual class
distinction that matters is that between those empowered by law to create and receive fiat
money, and those whose wealth depends upon actually useful economic activity. We have one
class that invents nothing, creates nothing, contributes nothing, but which still is able to make
demands on our collective output solely through a legally sanctioned ability to write checks
using money which did not exist until the check was written.

Logically, if this process has been used to extract wealth that was unearned, then a "revolution"
will consist in reversing this process, and to my mind the most sensible way to do that is
simply to reverse the process, to use inflation to transfer wealth from banks to the private
sector. Since inflation is bad over the long term, we simply recognize it for what it is--a
redistributive tool--use it, then discard it.

My reasoning is in the piece. Please read it. Although not strictly necessary to my argument, I
have also added an Appendix in which I deal with the actual goals of Keynesian economics,
which very plainly are not generalized wealth.

You may respond to