A DeFi Degen’s reaction to The Communist Manifesto

This paper is a reaction to the reading of The Community Manifesto (TCM) by Karl Marx and Freidrich Engels through the perspective of an individual that has studied and used Decentralized Finance (DeFi) extensively since approximately March 2020. This individual, known as Ceazor, can be seen by accessing his Youtube channel at https://www.youtube.com/@CeazorsSnackSandwich, or by reading his commentary via https://x.com/Ceazor7.

This paper is not an endorsement of communism, nor is it a condemnation. THC was simply a fountainhead of thoughts and this papar shares them.

The Process

The process for which this paper was written is as follows.

First a copy of TCM was obtained, the Penguin Books copy published in 1967 was the sole source. The Introduction by A.J.P. Tayor was not used, nor were the Notes by the same author found in the rear of the work. None of the Prefaces were read prior to writing this paper.

The core manifesto was read in full, and points were highlighted as being “interesting.” There was no intention to cherry pick for points that had relation to thoughts in DeFi. The reactionary writing was not started until after TCM was read in full and there were a few days of “forgetting” where consideration was not done. Then Ceazor simply went through the work again, typed out the quotes, in order of which they appear in TCM, and a reaction was written immediately as each quote was put in this paper. The writing of this paper was done over several sessions, but no quote was read a second time that was not reacted to immediately.

The format is pretty straightforward where the quote is presented as is in TCM, then the thoughts are presented thereafter.

The Quotes and Thoughts

“Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word oppressor and oppressed” (p79)

This clearly indicates that corruption has been a long standing structure. That there has always been haves and havenots. I have a love for DeFi because I see the potential for this to be removed. Permissionlessness is a core ethos of DeFi, you do not need to be a club member to be granted access, you simply need to understand the system, and how it works. Education in DeFi is also not highly gated. That said, there are still certainly cabals, and influencers that maintain these hierarchies of class. I hope that one day these will dissolve to something more free from human controls and particularly trust.

“…left remaining no other nexus between man and man than naked self interest, than callous ‘cash payments’. It has drowned the most heavenly ecstasies of religious fervour, or chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation.” (p82)

This passage clearly points to the reduction of that which humans create that is done for the good or the sake of the beauty that it produces. Everyone in the modern world considers what they will get for their efforts. What’s the pay? What’s the ROI? The only time I see this clearly removed from the thoughts of actors in DeFi is when I see actors taking action from a seat of financial comfort. They are not concerned where their next meal will be gotten, and they have the freedom to build, promote, or interact with systems for the sake of the good they produce. In the year 2025, I see this much less than I did in the years 2020 thru 2021. It seems we have been losing a swath of nobility in the space, perhaps because of thanklessness, or perhaps it’s a symptom of my own focus. That said there are still things being done in the space for the good of all, and not simply for the sake of egotistical self calculations.

“…converted the physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science, into paid wage-labourers.” (p82)

This line brings hard examples into the same consideration of the loss or the pursuit of prestige and noble ventures. DeFi is an industry focused on the betterment of financial systems- automation and permissionlessness. It, as current, does not seek to encourage the fields of law, medicine and religions, but there are some overlaps. But I do see the poet, or artist, being benefited by the systems we have created. NFT creators, mostly visual arts creators, have been granted predictable royalty distribution, as well as access to capital for the creation of their works, and a system to distribute their works to fans. There are even some systems for musical creators in the space with the same benefits. It would be wonderful to see if medical advice could be tokenized, as well as research. Getting medicine out from under the thumb of the pharmaceutical giants might encourage the research and use of procedures that are not concerned with profits for shareholders.

“…cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production.” (p83)

This passage screams volumes in the DeFi space. Innovation is on hyperdrive in the space and financial rewards go to upgrades, version 2s, and new teams. This is both a benefit as well as a crux of the space. Teams that have built something truly useful are often forgotten as users shift quickly with the agility the entire system affords them. However, laziness and idleness in this space is disincentivized drastically. Moats are nearly impossible to maintain and those that slow down are quickly replaced by those that are more hungry and eager. This is neither bad nor good, well perhaps it is both. I often find that I simply cannot keep up, but that even when I slack off, I return to new opportunities.

“…must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connexions everywhere.” (p83)

This passage is referring to the contamination of all pursuits with the consideration of financial benefits. Connections in DeFi are certainly growing. As mentioned in the previous reaction, even art is plugged into DeFi now. But is this a terrible thing? The world runs on financial systems. The ability for an artist to choose his diet, his advisors, his paths in life highly depends on the direction of his assets. We all vote with our money. Is it wrong or is it right, I know not the answer as I find it very hard to consider an alternative. I think it is much more important that even a “lowly” jpg creator is granted the same access to everything that is granted to the individual that comes from “old money.”

“…by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, but the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilization” (p84)

This passage is an introduction of the means by which “capitalism” enslaves all nations through an inability to compete. A simple example to illustrate this point can be seen in the effect the big box stores have on mom and pops shops. Now I do think this is unfortunate and I highly hate the lack of mastery achieved in artisans now, people are reduced to cogs, I do see some benefits of systems that are efficient. Where I hold most issue is where all of the revenue generated by providing a service or producing a product is funnelled away from the workers and into the hands of the passive “owners.” In DeFi, we see this in token holders that stake and collect fees from systems even though they did not build it, maintain it, or use it, but I purport that there is one major difference that makes it much more acceptable, and that is it is permissionless. Anyone, of any nation, so long as they have an internet connection, through a small amount of research, find themselves the beneficiary of this system. Stock holders in traditional finance (TradFi) share this feature but not on the scale of DeFi. To participate in a US corporate stock, you have to be a citizen of a country aligned with the USA.

“…the epidemic of overproduction…get over these crises?.. But enforced destruction of a mass of productive forces;…but the conquest of new markets, and by the more thorough exploitation of the old ones.” (p86)

This passage comments on the insatiable hunger that is capitalism, on how since it grows non stop, and feeds on profits, it needs to continue to grow, but markets eventually reach saturation and profits can only be obtained by reducing payments to the workers, expanding into new markets, or by creating new desires, new products, new markets. Enough is never enough. In DeFi we know this all too well. There are constant questions of “wen v2?”, “what’s the current meta, the current narrative?” It’s a constant game of having two hands, but 50 rabbits to collect. However, there are established protocols that have found loyalty in users and investors. People that have become tired of getting bitten by rabbits as they reach into the chaos for their next gains. I can only hope that they are enough to be enough.

“…a class of labourers, who live only so long as they find work, and who find work only so long as their labour increases capital.” (p87)

Here our authors are pointing to the inability of workers to break from the shackles of their employment and to find constant improvement in their performance to make means. True as it may be, I don’t see many alternatives anywhere. If you are a freeloader, you should not find life to be easy. In DeFi, a quote that always stuck with me was as follows. “Provide value where you can and success will find you.” In DeFi, the ability to contribute and be rewarded for the merit of your contribution is something to behold. In our systems, we reward people for their contribution in an autonomous manner. The simplest method is to become a stakeholder of a protocol, then contribute to its development in whatever manner you can, whether that be marketing, technological development, economic structuring, whatever. In degen terms, we say, “pamp your own bags.” There is no need for interviews, progress reports, and negotiations. Furthermore, you can enter and exit this system at any time, in most cases. However, timing considerations can have some drastic economic effects.

“…proletarians has lost all individual character…all charm for the workman.” (p87)

This elaborates on the point of production being converted into a machine, the individual worker into a cog, and the loss of the artisan. This point is hard to refute in the modern selection of produce. The differences between brands are not stark but there is still variety, but in most cases, this variety is developed by an organization rather than an individual’s creativity. In DeFi, we see a lot of copying of ideas, but with and without and iterations. You certainly are drawn to the larger communities and smaller niche communities are seen as failures, as not worth exploring, especially with capital. However within these communities individuals do stand out, but not usually for their creativity rather for their charisma. That said, DeFi, and crypto in general, has the tooling to allow anyone with an idea, to put their idea to market in a fast and efficient manner and I have personally seen an abundance of creativity in the space.

“Differences of age and sex have no longer any distinctive social validity for the working class.” (p88)

Marx and Engels here are pointing to the idea that human is human, good enough to do the labor? Good enough. Cheaper even better. I think this is a fantastic feature of DeFi though. People are very often represented in this space by avatars and cartoon characters. You seldom know if this project is built or run by a woman, man, or even child. You judge it, and consequently them, based 100 percent on merit and actions. That said, with the rise of exploitative behaviour, we are seeing more and more, the bringing forth of true identity to allow for legal repercussions for malicious actions. That said, the space is built on a foundation of equal opportunity whereas the traditional systems were built more so on a patriarchy and social hierarchy.

“…they [the bourgeois] club together in order to keep up the rate of wages, they found permanent associations in order to make provision beforehand for these occasional revolts.”(p90)

This is an illustration of how they set up systems to keep power even in the worst of worker loyalties. In TradFi, things are very gated, and favors and access are granted in this same manner. In DeFi, access is permissionless, free. In TradFi, governments have often bailed out mistakes made by organizations in power to maintain that power, but also to stifle revolt and panic. Mistakes have certainly been made in DeFi, and panic has ensued, but the space itself has reacted in two ways. Firstly users, leave, take more careful considerations next time, or band together to try to help prevent recurrences. No protocol in DeFi is too big to fail, although some are large enough to cause massive damage. Secondly, institutions in DeFi, AKA protocols, dAPPs, or DAOs, come together to explore solutions that can recover the losses, solutions like rebuilding something and using this service to fund recovery, hunting and tracking of thieves and the public calling out of thieves when they resurface.

“…their [the masters] mission is to destroy all previous securities for, and insurances of, individual property.”(p92)

Here is the contradiction that when a new social leader finds himself in power by successfully harnessing the system of production, he can only secure his power by removing the ability to rise in power for those over which he has power. Simply said, the rich do not want the wage earners to become rich. You see this in TradFi more and more as media has become more and more open source. Governments stimulate economies with injections of capital, which finds its way into the hands of the owners of production and service institutions. The only major difference in DeFi is that it is easier to become an “owner” or “shareholder” but the truly poor still need to sell any capital they are granted to pay for the costs of living. In DeFi we see a lot of what we have termed “airdrops” which are free capital allocations, but usually they are granted to users instead of simply to citizens of states.

“The modern labourer, on the contrary, instead of rising with the progress of industry, sinks deeper below the conditions of existence of his own class.” (p93)

This is a comment on the increasing gap between the wealthy and the blue collar workers. This is unquestionable, but we do see programs and campaigns that attempt to stem the growth of the gap. In DeFi, there are both zero sum games and value add. It’s incredibly easy these days to launch a zero sum game where a coin does nothing but trade, and it’s a first come first rich situation. These markets are often low float markets that are plagued with high volatility where any of the first can devastate the market when they exit, leaving many with worthless coins and thus increasing the gap between those individuals and the masses that participated. That said, there are also fantastic automated systems that are tokenized to allow fair sharing of revenue that these systems produce. There is still a pro rata distribution of money and therefore the larger players get a larger share but at least the smaller players are not left holding worthless bags, assuming the system has found product market fit and sustains its hold on the service market.

“What the bourgeoisie [owner of production systems], therefore, produces, above all, is its own gravediggers.” (p94)

In order for the owners to continue to succeed in the capitalism system they must continue to increase efficiency, demand is finite. As they reduce payments for labour and hire cheaper and cheaper, and even in our modern day of 2025, workers are replaced with robots and automation. This leaves fewer consumers with capital to buy the produce. What we see in 2025, and in DeFi is the rise of AI automation. AI has little need for capital, and especially traditional products, but it does have a need for energy which requires capital to purchase. So, I don’t think automation has zero need for capital but it certainly has less need for it, especially for the purchase of produce for the purpose of emotional adjustment, such as entertainment. DeFi is also built around automation and predictable immutable services. This reduces the need for maintenance and monitoring, which traditionally was a paid labour. The youth should highly consider the path they wish to take, as payment for services are becoming very rare.

“You are horrified at our intention to do away with private property. But in your existing society, private property is a already done away with for nine-tenths of the population” (p98)

One of the phrases often mocked by advocates of DeFi is “You will own nothing and you will be happy.” I would venture to say that nine-tenths of DeFi users follow the ethos that private property is essential to freedom and fairness. DeFi is built around the ethos that not only should private property exist, but it should be freely accessible to all, perhaps even to go so far as it is a human right.

“Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labour of others by means of such appropriations.” (p99)

This is certainly agreeable but all accept those that have luxury at the expense of others over which they have power. I believe true DeFi adheres to this ethos too. Of course there are actors in the space that take more than their fair share but they seldom subjugate individuals into wage labourers. In fact the opposite is often true, individuals join communities looking for wage labour opportunities and are found with a situation that allows for permissionless entry and exit, but also a requirement of intent to manage one’s own long term finances. DeFi does not often offer job security, but does offer everyone the opportunity to be their own boss, to a degree of their ambition.

“Abolition of the family…the present family [is] based on capital, on private gain” (p100)

The authors here point to the idea that motivation of capital gain is often closely tied to the enrichment of our bloodlines and not the human race as a whole. I don’t see a huge difference in these ideals in the 2025 modern society. We all care for our family and we wish them more comforts than we had. I would go so far as to say that some sole ambition is this, and that without a family, they would be happy with little more than necessity. The alternative is a metre stick of narcissism. I’m not even sure if it is possible to remove our desires to better the life of our children, but perhaps the adage “a rising tide raises all ships” might connect the ideals of Marx and Engels with this- if we better all we consequently better our own children too. In DeFi we have the concept of praising public goods. Actions and services that are produced for everyone to access. Perhaps this was the core of what the authors were aiming at, or should have been aiming at, and the choice of the term “abolition” was an oversight.

“…wanting to stop the exploitation of children by their parents” (p100)

The time of the work we are commenting on, is a very different time that what we see in 2025. But still we see exploitation of children; both by parents, and by society. However, we don’t see much of this in DeFi. Occasionally we see promotional campaigns that have used children, and we even see children participants. But due to the anonymous feature of most of DeFi, we seldom know the age, sex, and race, or counter parties, only their expressed ideas, and actions. I spend some time educating my children on finances, which I have learned a lot about through the exploration of DeFi, but beyond that, I do not let my children partake. That said there are instances of teens producing projects in DeFi, and I do wonder if the parents of them were granted full custody of the benefits reaped by that work.

“…children transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labour.” (p101)

This is a bleak reminder that children were often bartered with, sold off to other families and forced into labor positions that their parents were stuck in. The modern world has very much addressed this with the opportunity for many children to explore their own passions and interests. DeFi is no different, and as mentioned above, some teens are already contributing to the space and their ideas are finding their way into the open markets.

“…abolition of the community of women…of prostitution both public and private.” (p101)

Again a bleak past indeed. But again also, in DeFi many women have found success and equal opportunity. In fact, the anonymous nature allows for the sexes to even be a non-consideration.

“National differences and antagonisms between peoples are daily more and more vanishing.” (p102)

In isolation, this quote seems like a positive, but they are alluding to the idea that culture is being lost, to a system of vanilla. Where the beauty is replaced with mechanical efficiency. In DeFi, there is little room for culture, race, or anything. It simply doesn’t matter. The only way we know counter parties are different is by setting up calls- the scheduling of time zones and the exposing of oral accents. With financial systems, though, I think we should not incorporate culture and belief systems, beyond the thought that they should be permissionless and fair to all.

“…intellectual production changes in character in proportion as material production changed?” (p102)

Those that rule the forces of production set the narrative of ideas and beliefs. In DeFi we see this a lot actually. The current “meta” is not always that which is most popular rather that which is most profitable. Large players in the space make bets, which move price accordingly, then protect their investments with narrative sharing. Even narratives that are logically inferior, attract intelligent actors as they assess risk to reward metrics.

“When people speak of ideas that revolutionized society, they do but express the fact, that…” (p102/3)

This introduces the idea that from the old new is born, and that new ideas and systems come out of old systems that have created situations of discomfort. DeFi is no different. It is borne from the observations that TradFi is often corrupt, and if not, seldom fair and permissionless. We all have access to cash, but most find it coming and going, and the many lose and the few gain it all. DeFi is not perfect, and humans are not starting in the same place, and likely shouldn’t, but it does allow individuals that have the ambition and aptitude to gain footing without seeking access to gated opportunities

“Political power, properly so called, is merely the organized power of one class for the oppressing another.” (p105)

I’m not sure if DeFi solves this issue, as we still see influencers and cabals that take advantage of others. But generally, it’s not the case of where or by whom you were born, rather a metre stick of intelligence and gullibility. If you’re smart enough, and critical enough, you can find success in DeFi. That said, this might have always been the case. Perhaps, it’s only the speed of which intelligence can move from lower to higher.

In Closing

The intent of this work is not to speak ill or promote the ideas presented in TCM, rather was just a tool for which to philosophize. That said there are certainly ideals presented that are agreeable, and that perhaps, if communism were run autonomously, free from greed, it might have seen more success as a way to rule over mankind.

DeFi, is the field that I have found success in, and that undoubtedly creates biases that are hard to look past, but there is also unquestionable beauty in the predictable, immutable, permissionless nature of its roots. There will always be people that seek to take advantage of others, whichever system is adopted. Sometimes they do so out of desperation though, but, usually I suspect, they do so out of selfishness. I will continue to explore that which I have found so intriguing, attempt to avoid the pitfalls and ambushes, and seek my own success. You too, can find that which intrigues you and contribute to that to find fulfillment.