Marx believed capitalism would self destruct without assistance.  It was inevitable that we would evolve to a communist utopia.  This is like classical physics, but reality isn't like that with people.  That didn't happen and Marxism as a holistic ideology rather than a collection of buffet items should have died then.  But later generation marxists thought they might need to help the inevitable future along.  They were like consequentialists, justifying their actions on the basis of projected outcomes.  Some were revolutionaries, just replacing feudal governments directly with socialist governments that were supposedly going to build a post state communist utopia.  Some of them were accelerationists, believing the way to produce a post capitalist society was to sabotage the capitalist society so it would decay faster.  With all attendant suffering justifiable.  One tactic was to do things like promote fragmentation and ethnic infighting by gainsaying grand narratives.  This would cause corporations to make less profit, they believed.  Believe.  Instead of creating functional post capitalist societies as a model alternative, just break things, that's the way to be righteous.  There are supposedly right wing accelerationists also.  They all believe that creating anarchy is justified by the paradise (for the deserving, in some twists) that will follow it.  They're doing evil and patting themselves on the back about how it will lead to some great aftermath.  


I assert that the only way to know the future is to know it through God which we know through humans.   I'm offering a new conceptual basis for democracy.  The will of God, which takes into account the true consequences, is known through the will of humans.  This is a divine mandate basis for democracy like Jefferson's. Except that rights don't exist in nature, they're manmade.  Humans are important not because they have rights (what they deserve to be given) but because they have messages (which we get from them).  They can forge those messages, those votes, into rights or use them any other way.  Ask them which.  

This differs from Libertarians, whose true belief is that humans don't matter at all.  Money has rights, not people.  There is nothing special that appends to merely being human.  You only gain rights by gaining the money to buy them.  


I would qualify here, that belief in God not required for a person to be read as a God detector.  Being human makes you an instrument for reading the will of God. But that doesn't bestow individual rights.  Rights adhere only to groups and apply only to the group; the larger the group the higher priority the right.  Individuals have only the rights the social contract assigns them and the social contract is known only through the majority of the participants.  The only a priori individual right is the right to vote, essentially.


What about gerrymandering?  Where shall the lines be drawn?  Every society is a society and they overlap.  Any group that identifies itself as distinct counts.  The larger group takes precedence.  If there is a conflict between levels the higher level should be respected more, and if you can't do that you are seceding from it.  Which means you are outside the protections of the group's social contract.  

As for the concept of "late stage capitalism" as though Marx were scientific fact, I think capitalism really does tend to self destruct, but it also tends to crop up like a weed.  It is not going to be going extinct.  People claim property and engage in trade, you can't stop them.   It's a force of nature, you might as well harness it instead of promoting a religion like ideology about the paradise beyond it. 

It's like fire.  Dangerous, always hungry, insisting it must be free, but really useful if contained and properly harnessed.  The Chinese recognize that.  And reject God and democracy, which I link.  

I link God and democracy as do "democratic" Christian nationalists (some are authoritarian).  But the sequence is reversed for us.  A democratic Christian nationalist wants the vote restricted to Christians.  They don't recognize that God is known through all humans.  For them God is known only through certain authorities (Bible and dead theologists), and only those in agreement can be afforded democracy.  But they'll rule everybody, and it's OK because they all have an opportunity to join the party just by saying the right words and loving the empire.  

The state hears God through the people vs the people hear God through the state.  For them the US should be a satrapy of the church fathers whose home was the Roman Empire.  For Rome all that mattered was submission.  They didn't care about your character, just promoting the cause.  Ironic. That's what I say about God's cause.  Except I'm for asking all people what God thinks and they on the other hand are only for asking people selected by human authorities what God thinks.  

God wants everybody to have a vote.