Completely aside from issues of logical veracity and moral legitimacy in pursuing wealth by basically any means possible no matter the consequences, the wealthy "elite" literally shoot themselves in their own feet when they bring about widespread poverty and do not even attempt to seriously hide how predatory their employment, manufacturing, and sales practices are. For one thing, a lower class with high probability of climbing into the middle class due to genuine hard work and a middle class that is not at risk of dissolving into the lower class will probably not be enraged that certain people have much more than they do, because they have all they need to survive and live comfortably in some degree of luxury—or they have a fair chance at reaching this point.
If people were not struggling despite working hard or for many hours (including past the full-time threshold), it is unlikely that anywhere near as many who are not already infected by greed of their own would be so dissatisfied with the amount they currently possess. When masses of people slave away with less to show for it than a literal Biblical servant at the end or their seven-year maximum term (Deuteronomy 15:12-14), left with little to no free time and savings even after responsible spending on food, power, transportation, healthcare, and so on, they might naturally begin scrutinizing the economic and labor system they live under, even if not rationalistically. They might have nothing left over after paying for necessary expenses, and that is if they are not pushed into debt simply to survive in a modern society.
People who do not have surplus money to spend cannot contribute to the continued profits of the non-necessity businesses and those behind them—or, if they do, they are handling their resources very irrationally under the circumstances. Alternatively, they might validly lash out against the kinds of founders, executives, investors, and politicians that are making their lives so desperate through the likes of low wages and planned obsolescence. These same figures could have actually kept getting away with living for their incredibly erroneous and hollow priorities. But that would require that they not make the oppression so overt that almost everyone who does not rely on something like massive inheritances, nepotism, or theft struggles simply to get by from one day to another, drawing more attention to themselves and their asinine excesses.
The irony is that even extremely delusional, miserly, classist parasites clamoring for every additional dime they can siphon away from workers and consumers could actually, in all likelihood, avoid such widespread outrage—which can damage their ongoing profits—simply by not siphoning away as much. No rational person cares that others have more than they do in itself, or if they are bothered, they do not let it shape their beliefs and behaviors. All the wealthiest oppressors would have to do is pay workers enough to be comfortable in the current economic conditions (as in, truly livable compensation), save for extreme personal circumstances not reflective of the economy's inherent nature, and not place unnecessarily high or non-mutual prices on consumers; they could hold onto all other resources with their inflexible claws. By non-mutual prices, I mean a price that might be inflated to more than the bare minimum necessary to make a sustainable profit, with no additional quality being reflected for in the form of product longevity, useful or desired features, etc. The buyer merely pays more for heightened profits for the misers at the top of the hierarchy.
On a pragmatic level, someone could hoard money needlessly, reflecting their false philosophy centered on a social construct, without as much opposition if they just do not cross these specific lines. Now, no rationalistic person would ever live for monetary wealth, the societal power so often stemming from it, or the hedonistic worldview wealth can allow someone to more lavishly express. They would live for reason, the necessary truths that cannot have been any other way, not for a social construct or emotionalistic high. Perhaps literally no one who does not inherit extraordinarily high sums like billions of dollars with no active effort ever makes billions of dollars in a system like the American capitalist economy without engaging in some sort of theft, especially wage theft. Thus, they are by nature not living for reason and morality, but for things which are inherently lesser or meaningless altogether.
Social opposition or the lack thereof is not what legitimizes a business investor's/owner's worldview, priorities, or practices. Something is not illogical or immoral because any amount of people object to it, suffer because of it (and then literally anyone psychologically suffering because of a true idea would make it false, an outright logical impossibility), or feel it is false or wicked. Yet, the idiots who run many of the most powerful corporate entities could mitigate public outcry and all difficulties posed by it by not being quite so unrelenting, gratuitous, and inconspicuous about their dismissal of workers, consumers, and the poor. Such figures cannot eliminate the dissatisfied masses without having no one to exploit for the perpetuation of their extraordinary profits or lord their wealth over—again, aside from any logical and moral errors in their worldviews and actions, they make maintaining their objectives much more difficult for themselves by not toning down their own stupidity.
No comments:
Post a Comment