Now that the Republican Party’s national convention in Tampa has concluded and the Democrats begin theirs, we are approaching in theatrical terms, the “arc” of the political season. The moment of the play before it moves to its conclusion on election night in November. I found this article from The American Conservative through a diary recommending it at Daily Kos, a liberal website. Funny how reflective members from both sides of the political aisle are drawing the same conclusion — that there’s a revolution out there, but not necessarily of the masses. This revolution is not a sudden overthrow but a long, persistent advance of the super-rich who regard themselves as above politics, nation-states, and the rest of us. A good read, and a reminder of what’s at stake in 2012.–fb
The Revolt of the Rich
by Mike Lofgren
At the end of the Cold War many writers predicted the decline of the traditional nation-state. Some looked at the demise of the Soviet Union and foresaw the territorial state breaking up into statelets of different ethnic, religious, or economic compositions. This happened in the Balkans, the former Czechoslovakia, and Sudan. Others predicted a weakening of the state due to the rise of Fourth Generation warfare and the inability of national armies to adapt to it. The quagmires of Iraq and Afghanistan lend credence to that theory. There have been numerous books about globalization and how it would eliminate borders. But I am unaware of a well-developed theory from that time about how the super-rich and the corporations they run would secede from the nation state.
I do not mean secession by physical withdrawal from the territory of the state, although that happens from time to time—for example, Erik Prince, who was born into a fortune, is related to the even bigger Amway fortune, and made yet another fortune as CEO of the mercenary-for-hire firm Blackwater, moved his company (renamed Xe) to the United Arab Emirates in 2011. What I mean by secession is a withdrawal into enclaves, an internal immigration, whereby the rich disconnect themselves from the civic life of the nation and from any concern about its well being except as a place to extract loot.
Our plutocracy now lives like the British in colonial India: in the place and ruling it, but not of it. If one can afford private security, public safety is of no concern; if one owns a Gulfstream jet, crumbling bridges cause less apprehension—and viable public transportation doesn’t even show up on the radar screen. With private doctors on call and a chartered plane to get to the Mayo Clinic, why worry about Medicare?
Being in the country but not of it is what gives the contemporary American super-rich their quality of being abstracted and clueless. Perhaps that explains why Mitt Romney’s regular-guy anecdotes always seem a bit strained. I discussed this with a radio host who recounted a story about Robert Rubin, former secretary of the Treasury as well as an executive at Goldman Sachs and CitiGroup. Rubin was being chauffeured through Manhattan to reach some event whose attendees consisted of the Great and the Good such as himself. Along the way he encountered a traffic jam, and on arriving to his event—late—he complained to a city functionary with the power to look into it. “Where was the jam?” asked the functionary. Rubin, who had lived most of his life in Manhattan, a place of east-west numbered streets and north-south avenues, couldn’t tell him. The super-rich who determine our political arrangements apparently inhabit another, more refined dimension.
The full article is here.
I read the diary @Dkos that referenced this article, and yes, he has some good points, certainly. I won’t argue with anyone trying to point out how it is now Money or No Money here; we see it throughout society now, we just had to remove the blinders.
Fe – I’ll raise your Star Trek episode and go one further: H.G. Wells, The Time Traveler, with the Eloi and the Morlocks. Now there was class division! We shouldn’t forget that in our world, Wells was a socialist and progressive thinker. Most of his works had political overtones that resonate oh so well nowadays.
Fe, thanks for linking to this. Great find. To all, if you haven’t read Lofgren’s earlier article ripping the Republican Congress, it’s well worth the read.
I tend to think of economies as sort of like ecosystems. The emergence of a global financial elite has some resemblance to the way a class of apex predators emerges. Imagine we were to characterize modern society as made up of roughly five socioeconomic classes: the poor, the working class, the middle class, the professional class, and the elite. Suppose that in a very healthy society, the population of these classes is distributed roughly along a bell curve from poor to rich (5-20-50-20-5).
Global financial elites still depend upon well-populated and thriving professionals and traditional elite classes. After all, who runs their companies, educates their kids, builds their yachts, performs their plastic surgeries, and manages their stock portfolios? But the emergence of a global financial elite puts huge downward pressure on the middle class. The global financial elite do not need a robust middle class in order to survive, and they generate their wealth by preying upon resources that traditionally support robust middle classes.
Why do robbers steal from banks? Because that’s where the money is. Why do apex predators prey upon and devastate middle tier predators? Because that’s where the biomass is. Similarly, why do global financial elites devastate middle class wages and benefits, and redirect funding from public services into their own coffers? Because that’s where the resources are.
In a world dominated by global financial elites, you end up with only three classes. The GFEs themselves, several hundred global city-states which house the professional classes, and then a vast, widespread, impoverished global underclass needed only for cheap labor. And that’s what the world continues to look like for as long as the GFEs can keep it going, at least until the effects of climate change deplete the freshwater supply and make modern agriculture impossible.
This is a bit of an oversimplification, but not by much.
carecare7- no worries, I have never voted for a republican for President and never will. Like I said, a dark thought, and one not worth pursuing.
“I occasionally harbor the dark thought of voting for Rmoney to speed up the revolution.”
Please don’t. While I understand the sentiment I just don’t want to go there.
I remember some Christian fundamentalist wanting to blow up the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem to “hasten the start of WWIII and the return of Christ.” He was found out and arrested but for every one they catch there are more out there wanting to do the same and hasten the “new paradigm” they believe is the Second Coming of Christ. :::shivering;::
It is one thing to facilitate the birth of a new paradigm like a midwife (as Obama works to do) and quite another to rip the baby out of the womb with a bloody knife; Romney would be the bloody knife.
Niewot’s Son:
I always thought that the Prime Directive was a guideline, not a rule. At least for the television networks. But then again, watching the news media at work during any political campaign makes me think they are half-making up all the rules.
Fe- That was yet another episode in which Captain Kirk ignored the Prime Directive and interfered with the culture and politics of an alien race.
Len- They can’t get off the planet, the 1% cannot hide. They also fail to see how they too will be impacted by the consequences of their decisions. I occasionally harbor the dark thought of voting for Rmoney to speed up the revolution. 😉
Len:
Just sayin’. There are more than Two Americas, as Mr. Edwards once said. There are two worlds existing on one planet. The Cloud Dwellers and the miners. Like that Star Trek episode in the 1970s.
Fe: Thank you for bringing this to our attention. It is a scenario that others (such as Orwell, with his parable of street lamps) have envisioned, but never before has it been so pragmatically possible for such a stealth secession from nation states, their infrastructure and the ninety-nine percent. Of course, the one percent must not be too smug unless they can actually live on another planet. Gaia will not be mocked.