Liberalism: Strange and Monstrous by Jackson

Liberalism: Strange and Monstrous by Jackson - October 2026 Scholarship Essay

In the history of the development of capitalism, it appears that a fundamental trait of the economic system is bigotry and unequal ideologies. But in this system arises a current that argues in favor of private property, as long as all people are given equal rights in a fair and just “democracy.”
This liberalism may as well be described as bourgeois reformism. How can capitalism, in its inherently individualistic state, house principles of “equality”? Karl Marx asserts in Wage Labour and Capital that “the will of the capitalist is to take as much as possible.” When observing centuries of imperialism driven by the accumulation of capital, going as far as commodifying humans in the horrors of chattel slavery, it becomes clear that owning private property gradually harbors ruthless competitiveness between owners that alters the means of production through gentrification, exploiting and displacing local low-income households (which can be described as “domestic” neocolonialism) and directly spreading this economic dependence to the Global South, leading inevitably to imperial capitalism.
In order to avoid revealing the exploitation under capitalism, the liberals shift the blame to individual leaders. To view historical grievances from this perspective is historical idealism, a way to keep the ruling class in power by viewing bigoted rulers as pure political aberration. Much like the overall goal of capitalism, reformists view historical events based on individual actions, rather than a system. To the reformists, as long as a state has free elections, flaws in the system can be changed democratically. What an infantile disorder! Why should we believe that the bourgeoisie, a class that inherently controls the ballot, would be willing to vote out the very economic system that gives them power? As long as resources are strained, they can continue their exploitative rule.
In the entertainment industry, the bourgeoisie understands that the proletariat will fetishize a commodity more when it relates to them. Because of this, they begin to satirize the workers’ exploitation and turn this into a commodity that the proletariat can look at and view as “normal” life. Furthermore, the cultural hegemony that the capitalists hold over the proletariat is then exported to the global periphery through mass media, celebrity culture, and globalized entertainment. This causes non-capitalist countries to believe that the capitalist worldview is the only historical reality, establishing a cultural monopoly over the world. Imperialism, which is the highest stage of monopoly capitalism, does not only extract resources from the periphery nations, but also extracts culture, commodifies it for profit, and leaves the nation culturally hollowed out and economically dependent on the imperial capitalists.