Submitted By: Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger
I’ve long contended that I believe the end game of those Corporatists that run our world is a feudalistic state of affairs where they represent the “Nobility” of the Middle Ages. This theory of mine originally came about when I began to think about the mystifying rise of celebrities as cultural icons. The Kardashians, whatever it is that they do, certainly are among the most famous of today’s celebrities. Many of these celebrities are notable not for their talent, but for their ability to manipulate public relations and the media. The Kardashians were not the first intimation that came to me about what I see is a trend to use subtle propaganda techniques to pave the way for full blown Medieval Feudalism. One of the first indications that came to mind was the TV program “Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous.” The show’s host was Englishman Robin Leach. With his upper crust sounding English voice, actually a worked over Cockney dialect, he would breathlessly show the viewers sumptuous estates and introduce them to the wealthy celebrity wannabe’s who owned this monuments to poor taste. Around that time Donald Trump, the scion of a real estate empire married his middle European wife Ivanna, who taught this twit how to get publicity to publicize the Trump brand of over the top extravagance, coupled with a taste for gilt everywhere. Ivanna aged and outlived her usefulness to “The Donald” and he cast her aside for a much younger woman to grace his arm and broadcast his “potency.” The man has filed for bankruptcy many times, ran his Casinos into the ground and is far from the Billionaire Entrepreneur image he projects. Yet he runs seminars on how to get rich (easy to do when your father is a real estate baron) and has a well-rated program where he acts as a Judge as to how people are skilled in management. He has even had the temerity to play at running for President. The Trump name is more recognizable to the public than the name of the Chairman of the Federal Reserve.
The recent birth of the Royal baby in England and the round the clock coverage by CNN illustrates my point. Our news shows give us more “news” on the box office from this week’s movies, than it does about deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq. The “Cult of Celebrity” in my opinion is propaganda to pave the way for a feudal system where we the citizens spend our time thinking about the doings of our “betters”, rather than our responsibilities as citizens. When there is this absorption about the wealthy class and their lives, the fact that many escape their duplicitous deeds by being so wealthy, becomes and accepted reality. There is much evidence and little doubt that the recession of 2008 was brought about by illegal activity on the part of the financial community. Yet almost all of that community has escaped real criminal punishment for their deeds and when light prison sentences have been imposed, they spend their time is minimum security federal prison camps, with many of the comforts of home. Yes Bernie Madoff is in jail for life, but Bernie ripped off other rich people mainly and so had to be punished. Martha Stewart, though not to the manor born, acted like she was an arbiter of society. She was sent to jail for a minor violation because of fame and as an example to those who would rise above their station. This trend towards developing a “new nobility” to entrance us peasants is a difficult one to deal with since so many of us “low born” are fascinated by it. In truth “celebrity watching” has always been a human passion going back at least 5,000 years to ancient Sumer and Egypt.
We and many of the industrialized nations are supposed to be Republics, not Monarchies and to my mind we are fast elevating our “entrepreneurial and entertainment” class into our new nobility. The reality is that there is little any of us can do about this except to try to expose it and hope people wake up. I think though that having won the “celebrity war” there is coming an expansion by our “elite” into making ones status in society’s hierarchy, into ones’ privilege under the law and I’ll explain further the signs of this that I see occurring right now.One of the first signs of this change I perceive comes from the privatization of many of the Nation’s highways, making them high priced toll roads. The ostensible reason behind this is to defray the cost of maintaining these roads to the users rather than the taxpayers. Since the rise of the anti-tax movement led by Grover Norquist, our politicians are afraid to raise taxes overtly and so develop schemes to raise the money need to govern from hidden taxation, which regressively gives the greatest burden to those least able to pay the fare. Since the country as a whole has a poor public transportation system citizens are forced to rely on vehicles in order to work and do the other needed business of living life. Tolls mean nothing to the wealthy and in essence road privatization becomes a further step towards inequality of the classes.
This step has been exceeded in recent years by an even further stratification of the “privilege” of driving. In many cities around the country “rush hour” is the most difficult times of the day for drivers. We now have paid “Express Lanes” in many Cities. These lanes, for a fee, allow those who can afford it to move more quickly to and from their City destinations. Route I-95 going to and from Miami has one such system. Since my impending heart transplant caused me to begin the long trip into Miami during rush hours perhaps two to three times a week I became quite familiar with these paid express lanes about 3 ½ years ago. The difference in travel time was quite significant and yet living on a fixed income my necessary use of these lanes was somewhat of a hardship. As my wife would drive me in and back all those times I watched the stalled. Slow moving traffic in the non-express lanes and mused about the difference it made to those drivers. My contention is what we see in this phenomenon is merely the beginning of further “legalized” division of this country by economic/social class, which is fast bringing on all the characteristics of feudal society to our former republic. While I could give you further examples to prove my point I don’t have the space to make it replete with instances, nor complete with facts in this guest blog. I am expressing my viewpoint based on trends I perceive, the reader can agree or disagree with my suppositions.
If you disagree with my surmises, the following story may convince you to think again:
“Some prisoners at one California jail will now have the option to pay their way into a more comfortable stay, community news source the Argus reports.
The Fremont Police Department is now offering its inmates a “pay to stay” option. For a one-time fee of $45 plus $155 a night, prisoners serving short sentences on lesser charges can stay in a smaller facility while avoiding county jails.
“It’s still a jail; there’s no special treatment,” Lt. Mark Devine, a Fremont police official who oversees the program, told Chris De Benedetti of the Argus. “They get the same cot, blanket and food as anybody in the county jail, except that our jail is smaller, quieter and away from the county jail population.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/28/california-prison-pay-to-stay_n_3667573.html .
Let’s be honest here who is this “Jail” being designed for. Let’s say that someone is to be jailed for a week the cost would be $1,130. How many people who are jailed would be able to afford that amount plus any legal fees that they would incur? What is a short sentence? I think people would see 30 days as a short sentence. Your jail stay for 30 days would be $4,695. How many among us could afford that amount? What does “away from the county jail population” mean. My guess is it means Blacks, Hispanics and White “riffraff”. Please watch the short video from the Warden that is embedded in this article and you will see that my surmise is not incorrect.
My question is how long before this “reform” spreads countrywide and what does it mean for us as a society when it does? The rationale for this is to lower the costs to government of the prison systems. What other rationales, for other government services, will be made? My title in this piece refers to the movie “The Wizard of Oz”, where Dorothy and her cohorts follow the Yellow Brick Road to the Wizard and discover that he is a sham, learning that they must think and do for themselves. I believe we are being led down the same sort of road, but at destination’s end rather than the Wizard confessing his powerlessness, he will proclaim his omnipotence. Perhaps I am merely a paranoid old alarmist with my musings that this is one of many dangerous trends that are sweeping this country and creating a feudalist state, where once a republic existed? I don’t think so, but what do you think?
Submitted By: Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger.
Slartibartfast
1, August 11, 2013 at 3:59 am
“(you can’t really start a business if you don’t have some sort of good or service that you can produce 😉 )
Mike Spindell
1, August 11, 2013 at 8:11 am
“The end product of today’s Western capitalism is a neo-rentier economy—precisely what industrial capitalism and classical economists set out to replace during the Progressive Era from the late 19th to early 20th century. A financial class has usurped the role that landlords used to play—a class living off special privilege. Most economic rent is now paid out as interest. This rake-off interrupts the circular flow between production and consumption, causing economic shrinkage—a dynamic that is
the opposite of industrial capitalism’s original impulse. The “miracle of compound interest,” reinforced now by fiat credit creation, is cannibalizing industrial capital as well as the returns to labor.”
The goods and service of “Venture Capitalism” are WHAT?
Focusing and Growing profit to benefit a few while lessening earned income from the many is perverted.
Wealth for wealth’s sake is not Capitalism, it is Domination.
To stay on topic, I will name it Battered Serf Syndrome.
Mike,
The comment finally showed up. Thanks moderators.
Anyway, I think that there is more to your celebrity / elite perception (“the mystifying rise of celebrities as cultural icons”) than meets the eye at first blush.
In future posts along that line, you might want to include the relationship of the Pentagon to Hollywood … they have input / control in various degrees to movie making and TV series making.
That Pentagon-Hollywood relationship has long influenced militant ideology both here and abroad:
(Hypothesis: The Cultural Amygdala – 2). I mean this in the sense of the pillars of feudalism, the one being military service, and the other being the adulation of the lords and/or their surrogates.
Mike,
There was a change … instead of dropping off the edge of Word Press’s flat Earth, now my comment shows up … but it has this at the bottom: “Your comment is awaiting moderation.”
“As someone who is trying to become an entrepreneur, your statement that “we are fast elevating our “entrepreneurial and entertainment” class into our new nobility.” struck me.”
Slarti,
It’s so good to hear from you and get further news of your work on your project. When I talked of that class, except for those examples given, I was referring more to the adulation that has been revved up in the public perception. By the media elevating these people as examples of true success, they give a tandem message to everyone else that they are somehow less deserving and less worthy to receive the benefits of society. Mitt Romney’s 47% is an example of this thinking. Ironically, from my perspective, he is modelling in his words/thoughts exactly what I think is wrong from the perspective of the entrepreneurs.
Mitt sees the 47% as being “unproductive” burdens on society. The serfs so to speak who were thought of under Feudalism of being able to perform the most menial of tasks and whose lives were of no consequence to society as a whole. The remaining 53% though were not a real majority in the sense we see it, but a further hierarchy and stratification of society. Most of them would be mere cogs in the wheel of society. Low in status and presumed low in bodily worth. A soldier, a fireman or a policeman in this structure would merely be a necessary expendable a little above the bottom rung of factory workers and clerks. At the top in Mitt’s mind no doubt are those they would mislabel as the “Elite” or “Noble Class”. Entrepreneurs, Bankers and Industrialists. Clearly Mitt labels himself as an “Entrepreneur” although his business acumen was increased substantially with the $10 million his father gave him to start his business and from the social network/milieu he grew up in.
So it is not the fact of capitalistic success that the real entrepreneurs have achieved, it is the hagiography that then elevates them to the status of those so privileged as not to be affected by the “petty details” and problems of life that afflict the rest of us. Once a class such as this develops and it has solidified over the years since Reagan, it then begins to guard its privileges jealously. We must remember the Sumptuary Laws of Feudal times which were meant to keep the social stratification static and put each person in his place down to not being able to copy the clothing styles and manners of the Noble Class. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumptuary_laws
We will reach a point where beyond the cost, some of us who could afford it, won’t be able to drive a Bentley, because it would be above our social station.
I wish you much success in your enterprise Kevin and it would be a success well earned, by a good man. Knowing you I know you’re not the type of person(s) I’m writing about.
Mike Spindell 1, August 11, 2013 at 8:16 am
“Before a [feudal] lord could grant land (a fief) to someone, he had to make that person a vassal.”
Dredd,
Apt analogy. I think today though, while the Military is its own subset of the coming feudalism, the definition of vassalage has expanded. Certainly the Corporate Bureaucracy shows these elements regarding the perquisites and privileges of those rising in the hierarchy. Then too the interlocking Board of Directors of corporations also exemplifies it.
================================
My reply that Word Press censored was a reply to Bob, primarily, similar to your reply to him, in the sense that we both quoted from Hudson’s paper.
I will point out, again, by quoting from my Wikipedia quote up-thread that the PRIMARY foundation of feudalism is militarism:
The fact that there are more soldiers in U.S. military marching bands than in the State Department foreign corps, that there are over 1,000 U.S. military bases in 192 countries, that the entire world is divided up into US****COM commands, that we worship war religiously, and that the 2008 economic collapse followed a doubling of the military budget since 2000, are clues that only the clueless will miss.
Mike,
Word press has censored my pre-reply.
Bob 1, August 11, 2013 at 7:42 am
For a very long time Economist Michael Hudson has been developing his own analysis of our predicament that draws upon the history of medieval feudalism (he’s known as an accomplished Economic Historian as well) to characterize the development of “our” economic system over the past century and make very painfully clear where we’re headed and why:
The Road to Debt Deflation, Debt Peonage, and Neofeudalism
[link is in Bob’s comment up-thread]
It’s an entire education in 30 pages.
=============================
Interesting paper Bob.
Like other scholars, Hudson links feudalism (a.k.a. neofeudalism) with militarism like Madison and many others did.
Militarism is fundamental to understanding feudalism, and the neofeudalism of the neoCons:
(ibid, “The Road to Debt Deflation, Debt Peonage, and Neofeudalism“). The very highly decorated Marine General Smedley Butler, who coined the phrase “the 99%,” understood the feudalism in U.S. economic structure bound to militarism:
(The Universal Smedley, 1933 quote). None so blind as those on Highway 61 (a.k.a. the yellow brick road) who refuse to see.
“Before a [feudal] lord could grant land (a fief) to someone, he had to make that person a vassal.”
Dredd,
Apt analogy. I think today though, while the Military is its own subset of the coming feudalism, the definition of vassalage has expanded. Certainly the Corporate Bureaucracy shows these elements regarding the perquisites and privileges of those rising in the hierarchy. Then too the interlocking Board of Directors of corporations also exemplifies it.
Feudalism is fundamentally composed of military ideology:
(Feudalism, Wikipedia). In one sense, the military budget is an expression of feudalism.
Madison knew the game well and warned us … but we still refuse to listen.
For a very long time Economist Michael Hudson has been developing his own analysis of our predicament that draws upon the history of medieval feudalism (he’s known as an accomplished Economic Historian as well) to characterize the development of “our” economic system over the past century and make very painfully clear where we’re headed and why:
The Road to Debt Deflation, Debt Peonage, and Neofeudalism
http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_708.pdf
It’s an entire education in 30 pages.
Bob,
Thank you for Michael Hudson’s link. Its analysis details from an economic perspective what I have been postulating from sociological perspective. I don’t have time today to read the full document, but I will read it to educate myself. I have quoted the abstract below because in and of itself it supplies in economic terms what I attempt to describe sociologically.
“ABSTRACT
What is called “capitalism” is best understood as a series of stages. Industrial capitalism has given way to finance capitalism, which has passed through pension fund capitalism since the 1950s and a US-centered monetary imperialism since 1971, when the fiat dollar (created mainly to finance US global military spending) became the world’s monetary base. Fiat dollar credit
made possible the bubble economy after 1980, and its substage of casino capitalism. These economically radioactive decay stages resolved
into debt deflation after 2008, and are now settling into a leaden debt peonage
and the austerity of neo-serfdom. The end product of today’s Western capitalism is a neo-rentier economy—precisely what industrial capitalism and classical economists set out to replace during the Progressive Era from the late 19th to early 20th century. A financial class has usurped the role that landlords used to play—a class living off special privilege. Most economic rent is now paid out as interest. This rake-off interrupts the circular flow between production and consumption, causing economic shrinkage—a dynamic that is
the opposite of industrial capitalism’s original impulse. The “miracle of compound interest,” reinforced now by fiat credit creation, is cannibalizing industrial capital as well as the returns to labor.The political thrust of industrial capitalism was toward democratic parliamentary reform to break the stranglehold of landlords on national tax systems. But today’s finance capital is
inherently oligarchic. It seek s to capture the government—first and foremost the treasury, central bank, and courts—to enrich (indeed, to bail out) and untax the banking and financial sector and its major clients: real estate and monopolies. This is why financial “technocrats” (proxies and factotums for high finance) were imposed in Greece, and why Germany opposed a
public referendum on the European Central Bank’s austerity program.”
rafflaw 1, August 10, 2013 at 12:36 pm
… Not to quibble with anyone here, but to be technical, it is not the military budget that is the problem. …
=============================
Some of our most august statesmen, one “The Father of the Constitution”, also a congress member, a cabinet member, as well as being president, fingers the system:
(Quotes). It all ties in with the article I quote up-thread which you responded to indirectly.
So we have your opinion and the quotes from Madison, who saw the problems and tried to help solve them with such things as the Bill of Rights.
War is the wet-dream of the military, and is the nightmare of free people.
“Those truths are well established.”
Bron,
A flat tax isn’t fair. People who earn more money deserve to be taxed at a higher rate. After all, they have gotten more from society than those who earn lower wages (and generally make more use of things like highways, police, fire departments, publicly educated workers, etc.). In any case, while we want to encourage someone who makes, say, $30K to try and increase her salary to $40K, there is no advantage to society to incentivize someone making $1 million a year to try and raise their income to $2 million a year. Besides, with a marginal tax rate like we have now, if you make more money before taxes, you make more money after taxes so there really isn’t any disincentive if you understand what’s going on (which, admittedly, many Republicans appeared not to before the 2008 elections).
If I could re-write the tax code, I’d add a new tax bracket (say $1 million per year and above) with a marginal rate of 50%. I’d also have a debt-reduction tax of 60% (or more) on incomes over $10 million per year that would kick in only if the national debt was above a certain percentage of GNP. In addition, I’d either tie the brackets to the value of the dollar or require them to be revisited regularly. Finally, I would apply this tax to all forms of income, not just wages. Do you think this policy would hurt or help the financial stability of the country? Do you think that people would no longer have incentive to increase their income above $1 million/year? $10 million/year? If so, would that be a bad thing? Why? If you don’t want to raise taxes, how would you pay off the debt?
As for corporations, I’m all for a flat rate—of the profits they report to their shareholders.
p.s. Hi Byron!
p.p.s. What do you think about President Obama decreasing the deficit in every budget his administration has written? How many times did President Bush do that? (I’ll give you a hint: Obama’s already got him beat)
Mike,
As always, I find your argument compelling. As someone who is trying to become an entrepreneur, your statement that “we are fast elevating our “entrepreneurial and entertainment” class into our new nobility.” struck me. For a while now, I’ve been down in the weeds, learning about how to build a business: going to what I call “entrepreneurial support groups”, getting advice from anyone I could find with relevant expertise, and working on developing a product (you can’t really start a business if you don’t have some sort of good or service that you can produce 😉 ). Recently, I started working with a consultant from the Small Business Technology and Development Center and began a venture class (essentially a course in developing a business plan) in an effort to move from the development phase of this enterprise into the entrepreneurial phase.
While right now I’m just trying to get this thing off of the ground, my goal is to eventually turn it into a large company, so, since I’m obviously trying to climb into this “new nobility” (“merchant prince” sounds like a better job title than “coastline designer” to me 😛 ), your post made me think about why I was doing it. There are a bunch of personal, professional, intellectual, and financial reasons, but there are also some reasons relevant to your post, which basically boil down to: show that being good corporate citizen is an effective road to success.
I think that the reason large businesses are essentially trying to turn themselves into aristocracy is because they are inefficient and know they must tilt the playing field in any way they can or they wont be able to compete. I believe that most people, given the choice, would rather work for and buy from companies that share their values (and demonstrate them by the only method that counts—acting on them) and I also think that companies which embrace the right values and are good corporate citizens can be more effective because of their adaptability and their appeal to talented employees. In my opinion, companies like SAS or Kaggle will wipe the floor with anyone who can’t attract and keep the kind of personelle they do in a fair fight.
Senator McConnell’s personal fortune was between $9,839,049 to $44,587,000 in 2010 and he was ranked as the 10th wealthiest member of the U.S. Senate.[41]
My personal fortune is somewhere between the coffee can full of pennies on my counter and my next paycheck :o)
Bron,
There are several reasons for a flat tax being unworkable. First of all, the graduated tax is designed to shift the burden from those whose income is too low to carry that percentage to those who can better afford it. But as I see it, the most important thing is there will still be ways for the wealthy to game the system. Tax shelters will always be with us. Investments need to be offset by tax breaks. If a person turns around and reinvests income, it is no longer income. There are simply too many ways a flat tax is unfair.
However, I don’t have nearly as much problem with sales, or value added taxes. If the money is spent, it is taxed. Even then, there are some things that should be tax exempt, so it will be less of a burden to those who can least afford it. Medical bills should be paid with pre-tax dollars, not the complicated deduction system we have now. Staple foodstuffs should have no tax. Bread, milk, and vegetables could be tax free, but if one can afford luxury foods, they don’t need a sales tax break. Hamburger, fish and chicken is one thing, but caviar, lobster, and pre-prepared meals are another. Most grocery stores have software installed that can partial out what is, and is not, allowed with food stamps, and in some states there are tax exempt items. The software already exists and is installed. All it would need is for the defaults to be reset.
There are no simple solutions. One of the things that could be done right now is cut back on defense spending that sends money overseas, to line the pockets of the ungrateful and the crooked.
Bron:
I can answer your McConnell/Reid question. I offer the unique perspective of having boxed for a while in Vegas, but later teaching at WKU (Western Kentucky Univ.).
Harry Reid was a well-known pimp working the Strip. He Specialized in procuring Black women for Midwestern tourists (especially those from Western Pa., Northern Ohio and Indiana). He made a fortune in helping to develop the first hand-held, portable credit card authorization device. Prior to Harry, working gals still showed up with the old fashioned, manual credit card machines.
Word is, and I’m sure you can see this, that Mitch was a bodybuilder who moonlighted as a model for sculpture classes at Eastern Kentucky University in Richmond, Ky. He attracted local media attention when he introduced the “pose-down” at the 1974 Mr. Appalachia contest, at which he came from nowhere to crush all competition.
McConnell spun the attention from the 1974 competition into close friendships with several older, wealthy gentlemen. His friends’ financial advice facilitated Mitch making a small fortune in commodities during the brief 1980 run-up in gold prices to around $800 an ounce. MM took everything he had (or could borrow), got in cheap & got out before prices collapsed.
Mitch’s honours the fortune he earned through gold by donning an excess of “bling” when not doing Senate business. Most photographs are, however, intercepted and suppressed by the NSA. Rumour has it the NSA deal was actually inherited by McConnell, originally dating from an accommodation involving sensitive materials related to the infamous Ted Kennedy/Chris Dodd/unidentified cleaning woman “discussion” in the Washington Post’s cafeteria.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
Mark Twain,… “A Connecticut Yankee”
We were off before sunrise, Sandy riding and I limping along behind. In half an hour we came upon a group of ragged poor creatures who had assembled to mend the thing which was regarded as a road. They were as humble as animals to me; and when I proposed to breakfast with them, they were so flattered, so overwhelmed by this extraordinary condescension of mine that at first they were not able to believe that I was in earnest. My lady put up her scornful lip and withdrew to one side; she said in their hearing that she would as soon think of eating with the other cattle—a remark which embarrassed these poor devils merely because it referred to them, and not because it insulted or offended them, for it didn’t. And yet they were not slaves, not chattels. By a sarcasm of law and phrase they were freemen. Seven-tenths of the free population of the country were of just their class and degree: small “independent” farmers, artisans, etc.; which is to say, they were the nation, the actual Nation; they were about all of it that was useful, or worth saving, or really respect-worthy, and to subtract them would have been to subtract the Nation and leave behind some dregs, some refuse, in the shape of a king, nobility and gentry, idle, unproductive, acquainted mainly with the arts of wasting and destroying, and of no sort of use or value in any rationally constructed world.
get rid of the IRS and make everyone pay a flat tax of 10-20% on all income of any kind. If you make 200 bucks renting a house, send in 20-40 bucks.
no deductions no graduations just a flat tax.
Corporations, everyone.
I would also like to know how Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid made their money.
If contractors think toll roads are such a good idea then they need to take all of the risk, it is BS for the tax payer to line their pockets. But Virginia government wrote that contract.
Great job Mike. Another example of priorities geared to the wealthy Lords is the tax system.
Not to quibble with anyone here, but to be technical, it is not the military budget that is the problem. It is the cash poured around by corporations and banks to members of Congress. If our political system was not dependent upon large sums of money, the public good might actually be considered. and we wouldn’t be paying for jets that the military doesn’t really want. nick was right that money is the root of these problems. Don’t forget what the Supremes did to us in Citizens United.
OS,
another great hillbilly video. I think Sen. Mitch has some explaining to do to the citizens of Kentucky.
Yep, The military budget is our biggest threat. While programs that promote the general welfare are continually cut by congress due to sequestration, the military budget continues to grow and give more and more taxpayer payer money to private defense contractors.
What is leading us toward and into feudalism?
Our military budget is said to be our number one threat:
(Guardian, “The biggest threat to America? The size of its own military budget“, emphasis added).
And what does the military do with the money?
It builds the largest spy engine on Earth and spies on American Citizens.
And other citizens and countries that take it very seriously:
(Juan Cole, emphasis added).
Feudalism cannot rise again unless the government increasingly sees the people as something to abuse.
That phase has begun, we are on the yellow brick road.