The word commensal means “to eat at the same table.” In biology, the term describes a relationship in which one organism benefits from another without causing harm. Under capitalism, however, business owners profit from the labor of their employees. Because the surplus value generated by workers is largely appropriated by owners, society’s common resources are steadily transferred into private hands. The relationship between owners and employees is therefore, in essence, parasitic.
This manifesto proposes a way to dismantle capitalism and build a better, fairer society for all—founded on two simple principles.
A Commensal Society
In a commensal society, the idea of human equality is radicalized. If all people possess equal worth despite differing capacities and circumstances, then everyone’s time must likewise hold equal value. Consequently, all labor should be compensated equally. This principle is expressed through:
​
-
A universal wage for all working hours, regardless of the type of work performed or whether one is employed or self-employed.
-
Collective ownership of all surplus value, which is allocated to finance society’s common needs and therefore used for the benefit of all. The communal surplus fund can be structured to support both corporate reinvestment and the coverage of future deficits.
The purpose of a commensal society is to liberate individuals from oppression and economic injustice—primarily by creating equality of economic opportunity. In doing so, it fosters the possibility for individuals to live according to a principle greater than self-interest: the equal worth of all human beings. By contributing labor to a society built on genuine equality, people gain a sense of meaning and purpose that enriches their individual lives.
​​
​
Equality Without Uniformity
In a commensal society, economic differences can exist only to the extent that they arise from personal choices about working hours and consumption. Capitalism’s destructive dynamics are restrained not by abolishing private ownership—appropriating the means of production—but by seizing and controlling corporate profit.
Worker ownership or collective governance of every workplace is not necessary, nor is it desirable for everyone. Human beings are social, but remain individuals first. Many find fulfillment in the security and belonging that employment provides—being part of a community, a family, a circle of friends or colleagues. Many simply want a place where they can live in peace.
Yet some wish to create something of their own—to shape their own destiny. Entrepreneurs differ from employees in that they create their own workplace instead of joining an existing one. For entrepreneurs and owners to “eat at the same table” as their employees—to live from the work of others—they must not do so at the expense of those workers.
A private sector can be ethically sustainable only if it operates on commensal principles. Commensalism assumes that there are motives for starting and running a business beyond personal enrichment. And indeed, there are many: the desire to create something in one’s own name; to bring an idea into reality; to watch it grow and take shape. Ownership and control are essential to this creative drive. Commensalism seeks to preserve and nourish it.
​​
​
Markets Without Exploitation
Society is an organic entity, and its development and future needs can never be perfectly foreseen. A diversity of independent resource-creators—actors responding individually to society’s changing demands—is therefore necessary.
Markets are useful, but labor must cease to be a commodity.
When owners no longer extract surplus value from workers or accumulate personal wealth, new motives for entrepreneurship emerge. Creativity and sustainability become central. Competition and pricing evolve accordingly.
When the profits of a business are redirected toward society’s shared expenses, the exploitation of workers comes to an end. Entrepreneurs may benefit from the labor of others—but without harming them.
​​
​
A Moral Foundation for Society
Commensalism concerns the relationship between employer and employee, the value of work, and the fair sharing of the fruits and burdens of labor. Nature is not fair. Individuals act in their own interest. A society’s ideology must therefore carry a moral weight toward which individuals can aspire—one that shields us from both the harshness of nature and the weakness of the individual.
This proposal may appear utopian. Yet reality is more malleable than it seems. The ruling order always appears natural and sovereign—until the moment it collapses. What emerges afterward quickly comes to feel just as natural and inevitable.