Örebropartiet – Daniel Berntsson

Hoppa till innehåll

Sök efter:

Senaste inläggen

Örebropartiet

Immigration

Political individualism

Moral individualism

Förmögenhetsskatt bakvägen

Senaste kommentarer

Anonym på Inflationens dolda storlekMicke på Förmögenhetsskatt bakvägenAnonym på FörsörjningsbördanFörmögenhetsskatt ba… på Inflationens dolda storlekRupert på Försörjningsbördan<br>Arkiv

juli 2026

september 2019

april 2019

maj 2018

april 2018

mars 2018

januari 2018

september 2017

augusti 2017

april 2017

januari 2017

december 2016

september 2016

juli 2016

maj 2016

april 2016

mars 2016

februari 2016

Kategorier

Uncategorized

Meta

Logga in

Flöde för inlägg

Flöde för kommentarer

WordPress.org

Why did I, a libertarian anarchist, support the Örebro Party (ÖP), which is neither, with a donation?

Why indeed support anything having to do with party politics? At root, a state is some people using violence and threats to coerce others into obedience without consent. Because they can and it suits their purposes. Is it not immoral to involve oneself in that?

This is a dilemma. Suppose someone attacks you by shooting at you from behind innocent people. Should you shoot back to defend yourself and thereby kill innocent people? Or should you passively let yourself be killed and not only die but also reward murder and hostage taking? Voting and other types of participation in government are analogous.

This is not easy. For years I leaned towards pacifism. To not participate in government or other types of violence with collateral damage. Eventually the importance of incentives won me over to the other side. Such pacifism creates a world where the most ruthless and violent win, the ones who do not even hesitate to exploit others’ reluctance to see hostages harmed. When such behavior is the winning behavior there will be ever more of it.

But why ÖP in particular? What’s special about them? Well, in the beginning there were Markus Allard and Malcom Kyeyune. They were active in the Left (formerly Communist) Party in Sweden. In 2014 there was a power struggle and they were ousted, officially for supporting the Revolutionära Fronten organization.

Malcom Kyeyune and Markus Allard

Together with others in their political circle Allard started ÖP – a local party for the Örebro municipality – while Kyeyune pursued a career as a writer.

Around the same time they also started the podcast Markus and Malcom. For over a decade, they have used this podcast to explore, develop and promulgate their political positions. One of the major themes has been their concept of the "transferiat".

Being marxists, they had had the standard marxist class analysis. Capital owners control the means of production. Wage laborers are employed by the capital owners to produce goods. This ends up resulting in exploitation and extraction by the capital owners from the wage laborers, enriching the capital owners and impoverishing the wage laborers.

Looking at the society of today that is not what they saw. The totally dominating extractive dynamic is from both business owners and wage workers by taxation, to various sections of society living on these resources. The scale of this extraction is historically unprecedented, with the tax burden somewhere between 40% and 50% of GDP, compared to historically normal levels of around 7%. Allard and Kyeyune coined a term for the latter group, calling them the "transferiat".

Who are the transferiat? It consists of two major groups. One has a big overlap with the professional-managerial class. A very large section of the middle classes who directly or indirectly are supported by the public sector. Directly, those who simply work in all these public sector institutions. Indirectly, a vast ecosystem of nominally private sector businesses and consultants who through maneuvering, connections, bribing and regulatory capture (and, occasionally, honest bidding) redirect a share of the proceeds to themselves.

The other group is the underclass, who live on welfare subsidies as a lifestyle or are doing subsidized low end jobs. Without the resource transfers some of these would instead be in the marxist working class and others in the marxist lumpenproletariat.

The members of the socially higher subgroup of the transferiat are not numerous enough to win elections by themselves. They need the lower transferiat and they have a strong self-interest in it being large.

Most of the commanding heights in society are comprised of and controlled by the higher transferiat, including the government institutions, the universities and the bulk of mass media. And outcomes tend to align with incentives.

There has been no shortage of policies that result in large parts of the voting population being poor and dependent. Welfare systems with lock-in effects, taxation, exclusionary labor law, regulation and government housing projects. And immigration policies that in numerous ways make sure lots of immigrants...