> “Throughout centuries what we’ve seen when the masses think the elites have too much, one of two things happens: legislation to redistribute the wealth . . . or revolution to distribute property. Those are the two choices historically and debating it back and forth, saying ‘no, it’s capitalism; no, it’s socialism’ is what creates revolution.”
I couldn't access the article but the quote you give is weird: in the ages of kings, the masses thought that the elites have too much for centuries before the revolution happened.
It's striking that the rather obvious solution of the elites self-regulating a little as a way to avoid the dramatic problems they worry about doesn't seem to have been discussed.
Probably because self regulation doesn't work and never has, if it did there would be no need for laws or government we would all just self regulate and get along and help each other without a central authority with a monopoly on violence.
Another way to look at it, laws and democratic government are a form of self regulation similar to buying an alarm clock rather than just waking up on time through self control. Granted you may not have a choice in which alarm clock to buy or when the alarm is set because it is agreed upon over time through mass consensus.
I'm not advocating it as a solution for society, I'm just surprised that people would buy bunkers to help them survive the violence that they think inequality will cause, and not also think about taking steps to reduce the inequality by raising the living standards of those at the bottom. Both courses of action can be justified even at a self-interested level.
There are lots of situations where groups have voluntarily agreed to abide by a code of practice in order to avoid having one forced on them by democratic government (or a mob). The concept is common enough that the Canadian government describe it here [1] It absolutely can work, as long as the voluntary code goes far enough and is adhered to by enough of the relevant industry.
Presumably its a sort of tragedy of the commons type thing. Any one rich person could act, but (reasonably) doesn't think they could solve everything by themselves. They could try to persuade their rich friends, but unless enough people do it they might feel that their efforts and their precious, precious hoard would have been wasted
Because if they survive the class war - and god knows they are surely exceptional individuals - then they can start the whole process over again fleecing the individuals with the redistributed wealth.
Side Note: thats how I woke up in time for work this morning! No alarm clock, just... "What time is it?"
In order to have a culture absent regulation, we need to build a culture which has some measure of restraint, mutual aid, and mutual understanding. Capitalist economies only manage to do that when the group you wish to understand also has the money to be consumers.
On the flip side, like I told more than a few panhandlers when I was homeless: nobody is really going to help us when they think they're better than us. They can try to be charitable, but they wont ever seriously help as much as a comrade who found a piece to share.
Short of everyone UBI coming in and somehow magically not spiking rent, or creating the rent-control death spiral? Hey, those Socialists among Venezuelans are all just illiterate savages. Nevermind their near 100% literacy rate... Give people an excuse to distance themselves from an outsider, and most take it. It doesnt have to be honest, moral, or even helpful - people will swallow that lie.
But once you impose a fine for something? You've turned it into a commodity. You'll have to work harder than simply removing the fine to reverse that commodification.
But thats the problem with market expansion - it took a Civil War, and an Emancipation to rid the US of an entire market. Property owners were livid enough to see it coming. They called for "States Rights" to regulate, rather than ban this property. In 1865, a whole lot of property-owners were just plain mad - that Socialist Government took their property from them!
Its just property, not capable of independence, according to then-contemporary thought. Best to keep it, and those poor whites in line by turning them against each other. (Yes, that was a conscious decision. Read "A People's History of the United States".)
Speaking of poor whites... They didnt get to vote for Washington. We had to keep the ignorant out of high affairs like politics. Nevermind that a properly fancy party could sway an election among some of the Southern Plantation owners' states. Sometimes, politicians would find a small enough pool of voters to simply bribe enough of them (and yes, this was before the political machines).
It was only through hard work that any honest workers got to cast their own vote. Much less any incremental increase since then. And we're not done. The market continues.
Ridding the stock market of derivatives, (the sugar-high that has in 20 years ballooned to eclipse the entire world's non-derivative M3 money supply several times over) took the freaking Great Depression, and the potential rise of actual Socialism. Stock-brokers went from being well-paid, prestigious millionaires (when that meant something) to being middling-wage hucksters in the public eye.
Where was the concern for those Stockbrokers' property, intangible though it may be? Glass-Stegal stripped it! And the nation flourished for it.
When you let anyone think they're above someone else? They'll begin to neglect that humanity. They suffer for it, and so do we.
Look at what Trump's isolation-via-wealth has done to him - we find a man terrified of not being liked. He has to be the best... In terms that made him popular among his friends, when he was in his 20s-30s, and he is still chasing that. Even after it isnt culurally relevant the same way among the "commoners", he was handed a way for it to work again through TV. And thats gone. He might not even get to experience Love the same as the rest of us do.
Next, look at those cheering masses he has at rallies. Its no wonder he loves those events more than governing. Look at how they cheer when he s...
> The younger generation that support socialism are “people who don’t know history”, he said.
Gee, I wonder if he remembers Oklahoma was a bastion of American socialism until the red scare (and Trump's mentor, the insane, "sue everyone" fascist Roy Cohn) excommunicated and banished anyone who wasn't for the nouveau "libertarianism" anarcho-capitalism (socialism/regulatory capture for the rich, austerity/neglect for everyone else).
18 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 46.6 ms ] threadThe so called peasant revolts were quite regular occurrence in Europe.
But it isn't the first article in FT about the wealthy realizing that revolution is coming for them.
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/cartier-boss-says-thought-...
Another way to look at it, laws and democratic government are a form of self regulation similar to buying an alarm clock rather than just waking up on time through self control. Granted you may not have a choice in which alarm clock to buy or when the alarm is set because it is agreed upon over time through mass consensus.
There are lots of situations where groups have voluntarily agreed to abide by a code of practice in order to avoid having one forced on them by democratic government (or a mob). The concept is common enough that the Canadian government describe it here [1] It absolutely can work, as long as the voluntary code goes far enough and is adhered to by enough of the relevant industry.
[1] https://ic.gc.ca/eic/site/oca-bc.nsf/eng/ca00963.html
In order to have a culture absent regulation, we need to build a culture which has some measure of restraint, mutual aid, and mutual understanding. Capitalist economies only manage to do that when the group you wish to understand also has the money to be consumers.
On the flip side, like I told more than a few panhandlers when I was homeless: nobody is really going to help us when they think they're better than us. They can try to be charitable, but they wont ever seriously help as much as a comrade who found a piece to share.
Short of everyone UBI coming in and somehow magically not spiking rent, or creating the rent-control death spiral? Hey, those Socialists among Venezuelans are all just illiterate savages. Nevermind their near 100% literacy rate... Give people an excuse to distance themselves from an outsider, and most take it. It doesnt have to be honest, moral, or even helpful - people will swallow that lie.
It is all so much more complicated than that.
http://freakonomics.com/2013/10/23/what-makes-people-do-what...
But once you impose a fine for something? You've turned it into a commodity. You'll have to work harder than simply removing the fine to reverse that commodification.
But thats the problem with market expansion - it took a Civil War, and an Emancipation to rid the US of an entire market. Property owners were livid enough to see it coming. They called for "States Rights" to regulate, rather than ban this property. In 1865, a whole lot of property-owners were just plain mad - that Socialist Government took their property from them!
Its just property, not capable of independence, according to then-contemporary thought. Best to keep it, and those poor whites in line by turning them against each other. (Yes, that was a conscious decision. Read "A People's History of the United States".)
Speaking of poor whites... They didnt get to vote for Washington. We had to keep the ignorant out of high affairs like politics. Nevermind that a properly fancy party could sway an election among some of the Southern Plantation owners' states. Sometimes, politicians would find a small enough pool of voters to simply bribe enough of them (and yes, this was before the political machines).
It was only through hard work that any honest workers got to cast their own vote. Much less any incremental increase since then. And we're not done. The market continues.
Ridding the stock market of derivatives, (the sugar-high that has in 20 years ballooned to eclipse the entire world's non-derivative M3 money supply several times over) took the freaking Great Depression, and the potential rise of actual Socialism. Stock-brokers went from being well-paid, prestigious millionaires (when that meant something) to being middling-wage hucksters in the public eye.
Where was the concern for those Stockbrokers' property, intangible though it may be? Glass-Stegal stripped it! And the nation flourished for it.
When you let anyone think they're above someone else? They'll begin to neglect that humanity. They suffer for it, and so do we.
Look at what Trump's isolation-via-wealth has done to him - we find a man terrified of not being liked. He has to be the best... In terms that made him popular among his friends, when he was in his 20s-30s, and he is still chasing that. Even after it isnt culurally relevant the same way among the "commoners", he was handed a way for it to work again through TV. And thats gone. He might not even get to experience Love the same as the rest of us do.
Next, look at those cheering masses he has at rallies. Its no wonder he loves those events more than governing. Look at how they cheer when he s...
or in the original url change www. to amp. and scroll down
Viva la revolucion! ;-)
Gee, I wonder if he remembers Oklahoma was a bastion of American socialism until the red scare (and Trump's mentor, the insane, "sue everyone" fascist Roy Cohn) excommunicated and banished anyone who wasn't for the nouveau "libertarianism" anarcho-capitalism (socialism/regulatory capture for the rich, austerity/neglect for everyone else).