Yeah, this whole business about ants co-operating, drinking water together while singing Kumbaya is a bit of a myth. Just ask any 10 year boy what he saw happen when he mixed a bunch of red ants and black ants together in a jar. Its a horror show. Ants decapitating and dismembering each other.
Communism/Socialism: “Great Idea. Wrong Species.” (E. O. Wilson)
So nothing needs to be done about inequality or exploitation? Let the rich and powerful exploit workers, own slaves, do whatever they like? Might is naturally right?
Nothing can be done? Nothing needs to be done? Everything is as it should be?
You've got it backwards. Communism is the might-makes-right economic system, not capitalism. Marx wasn't appealing to morality or equal sharing; he was telling people to seize the means of production because it was in their interest to. It was "The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win." -- it's not like he was telling the European workers to seize the factories and share out all the proceeds to all the poorer people in third world countries. He was telling the European workers to keep the factories for themselves -- and they could have done it too, of course, because there were no chains, of course, because no, the rich and powerful are not allowed to own slaves, of course, because slavery is immoral and capitalism is not a might-makes-right economic system, of course. Conversely, the communists ended up enslaving the workers in all the countries they took over -- and that was entirely predictable.
As far as exploitation goes, the socialist theory of exploitation is zero-sum-game reasoning, which is dead wrong. It's a mathematical certainty that the workers must be being exploited, so the theory goes, because the owners are getting more out than they put in. But in reality the workers are getting more out than they put in too, so by that criterion the workers must be exploiting the owners too. Everybody is exploiting everybody, and everybody benefits from all that mutual co-exploitation, because production is synergistic. So if you want to talk about exploitation as a problem, first cough up an explanation for how to recognize it that doesn't implicitly take for granted that economics is a zero-sum game, and then we can figure out how to address it.
As far as inequality goes, plenty is being done in capitalist countries. In the U.S. for instance, we have progressive income tax, social security, medicare, medicaid, welfare, food stamps, earned income tax credit, and socialized medicine. (Which the U.S. has, of course -- just the most inefficient and poorly designed socialized medicine system in the first world.) If some people want to do more than that about inequality and they think Bezos is being paid more than he's contributing to the rest of us, they're free to trade among themselves and cut him out of their deals.
The "working for the government" metaphor is at least fact-based: the government is actually measurably taking 20% of some billionaire's income. When someone trots out the "I'm paying billionaires' tax burden" metaphor, what facts does his claim that he's paying more than "appropriate" and billionaires are paying less than "appropriate" reference? How are "appropriate" quantities measurable?
