Submitted by: Mike Spindell, guest blogger
When it comes to standard of living I can’t complain. Between a pension and social security I live comfortably, though definitely without luxury. I have no investments and minimal savings so that I in essence live from check to check, as do most Americans less fortunate. Would I like thousands in the bank, of course? Would I like to travel overseas, as I never have, of course I would. It would also be nice to have a luxury auto that accommodates my long legs, 72” 3D plasma TV and many other accoutrements of our consumer society. I know I’d enjoy them, but frankly I am content with what I have and do not begrudge those with far more material things, savings and income. In this respect I am decidedly a creature of what has been known up to now as the “Middle/Working Class”. It is a vanishing citizen category that I identify with most closely and is gradually through conservative policies being driven down towards underclass status.
In addition, my entire working career was spent dealing with those people who can be roughly characterized in American terms as the “Underclass” due to poverty, race, ethnicity, disability, mental illness, criminality and addiction. I know first hand the depredations suffered by this portion of our citizens and this knowledge via experience, is something not shared by most Americans. My work exposed me to the basic unfairness of our system and I must admit my experiences fill me with rage towards those who lack empathy for the ignored and maltreated. Some say that this disparity is merely the result of lack off effort on their part, or of the natural result of lack of ability. Those that do are basically people ignorant of how the American system works and the fact that the putative “race” towards the top is a fixed affair, in all of its’ aspects. Since this is a legal opinion blog I would be giving its purpose short shrift was I not to mention that inequity of result has been a standard of our legal system since our Country’s inception. With a few exceptions used to demonstrate the opposite, the truth is as Leonard Cohen states so eloquently “Everybody knows the game is rotten”.
To me it is a fact that inequality is inherent in our system. Please indulge me to look at what I find most perplexing in this state of things and why I think it exists. Why does it seem that many people, who have received so much benefit from the fruits of this nation, are so begrudging of having those less fortunate at least live more comfortable lives?
The tax cut that G.W. Bush bestowed on the wealthy came at the point that we had balanced the budget and were on the cusp of two wars. For those this tax cut benefited most, the gains were minimal compared to their incomes. Given that now the same party that pushed these tax cuts, causing the huge deficits, are now declaiming from sea to sea that we are drowning in deficits, yet refuse to let these cuts die. What is going on here? Their propaganda of course is that tax cuts stimulate the economy, in the face of the fact that the mass of Americans suffered economically under Bush II and that reality has proven their claims fallacious. The mythology of small government, tax cuts for the wealthy and tax relief for business is proffered by both parties, in thrall to the 1% and to the multinational corporations paying them campaign dollars. Bill Clinton played this game, as did Al Gore as they helped move their party rightward and then were “shocked…..shocked I tell you” that the elected officialdom in this country became more and more creatures of the extreme right wing and almost destroyed them. Barack Obama, has adopted Clinton/Gores adoption of the “government is the enemy theme”, put forth by a washed up movie star, repackaged as a “Potemkin President”. That Reagan recently polled as the “Greatest American President” is evidence of the effectiveness of the money expended on political propaganda, used to destroy the faith of the American people in its government and putative democratic processes.
After many years of being a political junkie and a partisan of a humane world, I have come to see that the various economic theories, the various political “Isms” and philosophies are mere chimeras used to gull the majority of people into acting in their own worst interest. While I can discern the logical methodology being used to complete the domination of the people, the purpose of doing so by ensuring that the lives of the middle/working classes and the poor become ever more horrible is more elusive to define. Although via my training in Gestalt Psychotherapy, I was taught to forget about the “why” and concentrate on “how” and what, nevertheless I need to discern the motivation because it seems so damned illogical to me. If you have enough of “everything”, so that what you don’t have ceases to be of importance, why want it all? You can only have so much wealth, own so many homes, drive so many extravagant autos and bed so many beautiful people. When does it become enough? When do you throw crumbs to the unwashed masses, so that they won’t rise up in distress and rage to overthrow you?
In my mind there are two strains that follow the motivation of those in power and seeking more. These two strains may overlap, or remain separate in different people, but in tandem they explain to me the why of this illogical behavior of destruction. The first strain I would call Narcissism, but not as narrowly defined as in the psychological sense. The Narcissist faction would include those born to be elite and those who struggled to enter the elite. The world is literally their oyster. They deserve it all. They are in their minds of a finer cut of cloth than the masses and so are entitled to be put on a pedestal of privilege.
The Narcissists require that they appear decidedly different from the masses. In a nation living in political and economic equality how would they stand out? In a nation not concerned with materialism, the advantage of their wealth would make them ordinary and “ordinary” is intolerable to the Narcissists.
This is a historical tendency best illustrated by sumptuary laws:
“In the Late Middle Ages, sumptuary laws were instituted as a way for the nobility to cap the conspicuous consumption of the prosperous bourgeoisie of medieval cities, and they continued to be used for these purposes well into the 17th century.”
With the rise of the bourgeoisie, the merchant classes, the nobility whose wealth was land-based found that these “merchants” were becoming as wealthy as them and could dress in equal finery. Thus people on first glance could not differentiate who was “noble” and who was “common”. This was intolerable to the nobility, who in their narcissism felt their elite status was threatened. Indeed, the sumptuary laws in the end proved futile, as the merchant/banking classes succeeded to exceed royalty and nobility in wealth and bought titles, previously won hundreds of years before by combat. The merchant classes having equaled and in some cases replaced nobility, now became imbued with a similar narcissistic need. They had no desire to, nor could they “win their spurs” in battle. They could, however, become patrons of intellectuals who were more than willing to develop philosophies that would begin to exalt the benefits bestowed on the masses by this new elite and their necessity for the maintenance of a stable society. The end result was the same; however, wealth, privilege and most importantly status were maintained. “Winners” and “Losers” were once again apparent.
Today in America, among the modern Narcissists we can count the Bush Family, the Koch Brothers, the Mars family, the Walton’s, Mitt Romney and their Court Jester, Donald Trump. Having inherited everything they have, having been advanced far beyond their capabilities, they need to stifle the empty suspicion in their guts that they are not worthy. So they latch onto paeans to selfishness made up of empty concepts of political philosophy. The masses, so undeserving, are not entitled to any assistance. Their lives are meaningless in their scheme of things except as servants and canon fodder for wars that vicariously elevate Narcissists to noble status. The masses must be distracted by entertainment, cowed by embarrassment and kept economically helpless. At the same time the insecurity of the masses must be enforced by the propaganda of the “American Dream”, so that even with modest success they are deemed failures in the scheme of things.
The second strain that I see as being the underpinning of American class warfare is what I call the “Hucksters”. These are the opportunists, many of them sociopaths, who have intuitively understood that a large percentage of humanity wishes to follow rather than lead. Their followers, identified as “Right Wing Authoritarians” in the book I mentioned here: http://jonathanturley.org/2012/01/21/the-authoritarians-a-book-review-and-book/ by Bob Altemeyer, are people who are slavish to the “wisdom” of authorities they listen to, excluding other viewpoints. These slavish, authoritarian personalities are not just denizens of the right wing either. Left or right the “RWA’s” as Altemeyer calls them, look for simple answers to the complex problems we humans face. They prefer the solutions that lead them to casting blame upon groups identified as “the other”, they want easy answers to issues of great intricacy and if cruelty and violence are deemed part of the solution, more the better.
The Hucksters have learned how to manipulate the RWA’s, through political philosophy religion and/or bigotry. A huckster may or may not even believe what they are selling, because to them the sale and their advancement towards power are the end game. When they do believe in something they are willing to sacrifice those beliefs in the service of the maintenance of their own status ala Bill Clinton. The current public examples of the Huckster are Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and perhaps even Barack Obama.
This is my explanation of the phenomenon we see repeated repeatedly in human history of the elite abusing the mass of people in the service of their own glorification. They have always been able to do it as shown by that earliest of human edifices the Pyramids. No doubt the thousands that slaved for years to create these edifices believed that the fortune of their Pharaohs was tied to their own and in this foolish belief we see the power that falsehood has in driving human activity. My point in the end is that the real impetus for the politics, policies and beliefs that seem to impel us to action, are merely the extensions of human egos at all levels of notoriety. Nevertheless, knowing this and imbued with the cynicism this knowledge causes, I still retain my idealism. My desire is to work to perform tikkun olam, a Hebrew phrase meaning “repairing the world”, despite its seeming futility in the face of rampaging ego-centric behavior. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tikkun_olam That is why I write here, for given my rage at the unfairness at the heart of our society, I must do something.
You’ve presumably now read my take on why the seeming selfishness of the “Haves” has driven our world, when the wealth of it is such that all humans can live a good existence, even while the elite flourish. What is your opinion? Perhaps you can add to my knowledge with your perception of other motivations driving this irrational need to have it all at the expense of those with less?
Submitted by: Mike Spindell, guest blogger.
Hedgehog,
You have left and won’t come back, but anyway wanted to add on the below by you.
“And there are those who will remain poor throughout their lives, and pass that on to their children. This is called bad luck, for some reason. And as it turns out, where there is more government support for the poor, there is also more of this “bad luck”.”
If we say the same child had been adopted (as indeed happens with adopted children) from this culture of contentment and placed with a family of “hard workers”, the would we agree that the outcome would be different due to culture. I think so. What my contention is, is that we can not abandon the contententeds solely on the basis of the demerit that they have no vision, etc. I don’t feel christly motivated, a do-gooders, but someone who wants them to stop producing problems, and won’t practice genocide—-not that you suggested that. Just sharpen Obamas position a bit and we’ve got it. Who’s next on the drone list? OWS?
“To me it is a fact that inequality is inherent in our system …. With a few exceptions used to demonstrate the opposite, the truth is as Leonard Cohen states so eloquently “Everybody knows the game is rotten”.
The one supposedly purifying event this century was 9/11 … in the sense that our government, the 1% plutocracy, projected purified rage against all the attackers. All the perpetrators were to be brought to justice.
But as the NY Times, Chris Matthews of Hardball, Morning Joe Show, two Senators, and others, point out, that is not the truth of the matter.
Saudi Arabia participated in 9/11, according to two Senators, according to a boatload of lawyers suing Saudi Arabia in a Manhattan federal district court, and according to others.
But they all say the case, the justice, is not going anywhere because Saudi Arabia has so much oil and we need oil more than we need justice.
It’s 12:30 AM. Nighty night all.
Michaelb,
Thank you for your reply. Please, do say where you find documentaries.
There is only so much we get access to via the public sponsored by fee channels.
And serendipity, one of my favorite subjects. Sometimes it is like an angel guiding you, I feel.
Hedgehog,
We disagree. I don’t think it is a culture of contentment, but a realization that the game is rotten. And to succeed with the odds stacked against you is not easy. This woman, to continue, had a responsible husband, and the chances of that are little. She challenged her children, only that would start the process. But then it was the childrens willingness to overcome the factors stacked against them to be the deciding factor, not the bad schools, not the ignorance surrounding them, not the “no problem” culture—-on that we agree.
Many points made by you and others are valid in my eyes, but a generalization you made as to culture of contentment is not for me.
I do not see good schools with reality oriented programs as being bad.
Nor do I see cultural enrichment as bad either. We got once in our school days a trip to hear the NC Symphony orchestra play a child program. It prepared the ground for sowing by my mother who purchase 2 45prm classical symphonies some years later.
BTW, I did not see any black children there at the concert.
Wish I had facts to shore up my argument, but no.
But think you are snobbing with your quotes about newly acquired game theory knowledge, and NO I don’t know the yeast growth curve—–
but I have taken a course in Evolutional biology at Stockholms University last winter. So do enlighten me.
Oh yes, the results of unrestrained exponential growth in a closed environment is well-known, even to SF readers, among other growth problems
Thanks for the pleasure of chatting, but have always admitted that my facts are few, and my opinions are many—–but the latter are in no way cast in concrete.
Speaking of snobbery, have you read about the world’s first planned cities, with standardized bricks, standard width of streets and avenues, and underground sewage ducts? What’s it called? Where were they, when, what did their existence depend on both locally and at a greater distance.
The nation state extended west to east 800 miles and about the same north to south..
What are they called and where were they living? And what happened to them, and what led up to them?
idealist707 http://topdocumentaryfilms.com
While there are no doubt other motives at work among the 1%, the ‘Narcissist’ and ‘Huckster’ types probably account for the great majority. .
Great article…..
Why not ask what motivates these people?
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LMC.asp
Why beg the government to take your money and disperse it, when you could retain control of it, distribute it to whoever you felt merited it the most. and know that they received more money from you directly than if you had allowed your money to be funneled through the largest bureaucracy in human history?
Thorstein Veblen pretty much covered this subject in his classic book “The Theory of the Leisure Class” (1899). George Orwel, for his part, has contributed several excellent analysis of social and economic stratification, especially in his study of an impoverished English coal-mining community in “The Road to Wign Pier (1937) and — without peer for its universal applicability — “The Theory and Practice of Oligarchal Collectivism” — contained in his prophetic novel, 1984.
As for Shelly’s great poem, “Ozymandias,” I found it quite inspirational and used it as a model for one of my own poems dealing with the daily depredations of the Apartheid Zionist Entity upon the captive Palestinian peoples who simply refuse to either go away or die. With reference to America’s obsequious championing of this crusading travesty, I wrote:
“Cozy, Scandalous”
I met a refugee from Gaza Strip,
Who spoke to me with empty, staring eyes
Dumb words whose depth of pain I could not grip
With all the helping hands the world denies
While lapping up the lurid lies that slip
And roll so greasy off the practiced tongue
Of Zionists whose caged and wounded prey
Are told to flee and leave their dying young
To weep beside the corpses of their old
In darkened shattered former homes where they
Cannot refute the garbage we’ve been told
By glib Israeli liars trained to spread
A veil of darkness over crimes they’ve sold
As “Peaceful Co-Existence” — with the dead.
Michael Murry, The Misfortune Teller, Copyright 2009
So, we can at least discern the motivation of Newt Gingrich’s billionaire backer, Las Vegas mogul, Sheldon Adelson.
“Some may think we’d be better off without the uber-rich, and maybe we would be. But I’d personally pay a bit of my own income, for an accurate picture of how much better off our truly poor would be.”
Considering people who create wealth through peaceful voluntary transactions are the only people who are truly productive, they are the ones the government must confiscate resources from to redistribute in the first place. Without those people, there would be nothing to redistribute, so the poor would be much worse off, because it would not only would a job be harder to find, so would any governmental financial assistance, if they could not.
So save your money. I just showed you for free.
Responding to idealist707
Mike Spindell said in the article: “The Hucksters have learned how to manipulate the RWA’s, through political philosophy religion and/or bigotry. A huckster may or may not even believe what they are selling, because to them the sale and their advancement towards power are the end game.”
Mike, I have only recently been introduced to the ideas of “political science” and “game theory”, and I have arrived at the same conclusion about our leaders. Some argue that they are sociopaths, but I would argue that they merely suffer from personality disorders. But, like everything else, we make a choice when we decide not to compete with one group or another. And it’s not like there’s a conspiracy to keep these bodies of knowledge secret.
Professor Benjamin Polak of Yale has a series of lectures online for those wishing to get at least an initiation into game theory and how it’s related to politics. I suspect that most of the regulars here are familiar with game theory, but here’s the link: http://academicearth.org/courses/game-theory
“You could, am sure, come with more references like your 80 year old neighbor, so won’t compete there. Rather say shall we look at his parents, his social background, his education, and the world of opportunities available to him when leaving school?”
idealist, I would have to point to your post as support for my statement. I would argue that there is a culture of contentment in poverty that hinders advancement. There are those who rise above it and establish an environment where their offspring will do even better. This is called hard work. And there are those who will remain poor throughout their lives, and pass that on to their children. This is called bad luck, for some reason. And as it turns out, where there is more government support for the poor, there is also more of this “bad luck”.
A policy of equal results is a bad policy for many reasons. But chief among those reasons is that it discourages upward mobility; replacing it, instead, with contentment.
As a final note, I wonder if you are familiar with the yeast growth curve? I think it’s pretty relevant to any discussion of poverty.
at one time we had a saying “there but by the grace of god go i.”
now it’s “the lord helps those who help themselves.”
Thanks Elaine. I hope this intrusion isn’t detracting from Mike’s excellent article and the legitimate, good faith responses.
I think the 1% is broad enough. The true distinction, in my mind, is whether somebody ever has to work again. If you look at Romney’s portfolio, you will see it is not unusual for the investments of the wealthy, even in a poor economic climate, to earn 10% ROI.
Other psychological studies suggest that, with minor corrections for cost of living in various parts of this country, a $75,000 gross income is where “happiness” stops correlating very well with income. Which suggests that most people would be quite happy with a $75K income if they did not have to work at all for it.
With Romney’s investment example, that could be accomplished with $750K in investments, which in turn, for somebody earning $375K, could be accomplished in about 4 years of saving, if they lived on $75K.
So a $375K income is a good enough cutoff. Most of us work a 40 year career because we must. Most people earning $375K a year already have $750K in investments and really do not have to work at all. So if they are working, they are working for very different reasons than the rest of us. It isn’t to pay the electric bill, mortgage, car payment or grocery bill. It is for status and ego and compulsions, in a bid to make themselves more than mere mortals. And, I believe, all for nought.
Here is the poem, by Shelley, from 1818:
“I met a traveller from an antique land,
Who said — “two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert … near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lips, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal these words appear:
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings,
Look on my Works ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.”
The previous comment was not posted by Lawrence Rafferty.
We would be a far better country if we had no wealthy people. The solution to our many problems is to (peaceably)force a large-scale wealth transfer, whereby resources are apportioned according to need instead of merit. Corporations and wealthy people have destroyed our country. Were it not for those twin devils, everyone would be enjoying a higher standard of living, there would be no homeless population, everyone would enjoy free healthcare, and hopeless poverty would be eradicated.
Gene H:
For you and everyone, http://www.lettersofnote.com/
MichaeB
Don’t want to spoil it for others, so stop reading you others……
After 28 minutes one conclusion is that, given the grounds of how corporate advancement functions, then the tops of corporations are corporate psychopaths, since they are most competitive, most convincing projectors of the readable signs of competence, and restrained by nothing.
Showing pictures of nationheads, who could be expected to be fisheads, leads to the natural assumptions that most leaders of nations, in fact most leaders are psychopaths. And considering their estimate that one percent are psychopaths—-then why not, one is forced to say. WHY NOT??
Given their weakness for chancetaking, rather than analysis, however weakens to some degree this conclusion. I mean they haven’t blown us up——-YET.
Will watch the rest later. How did you come upon this video?
I can identify at least 3 I’ve met. And don’t know about the 4th, but he was a corporate head who climbed finally to Chairman of the Board for a 110,000 employee firm, coming up despite 3 major well-known failures.
I just so happened to browsing through documentaries BEFORE I read this thread from MikeS. Quite serendipitous but amazingly relevant.