The New Class War

[Endus]

I argue, as does the article or it might, that the UN and NATO would be the heralds of the 1984 scenario the article I linked worries over.

Any global government/bureaucracy or center for a ruling class to further entrench power only adds to that scenario coming to fruition.

Right, but the article you cited ignored ideological concepts like social democracy, which is silly.

Take Canada. Our representatives aren't a class above society; they're often middle-class folks. You only need to get known in your own local town to get elected to Parliament; my old town of Waterloo was one single riding. The current Minister of Small Business and Tourism, and the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, is Bardish Chagger, who's the representative for Waterloo. Nobody else voted for her, just people in that one riding. Her closest connection to politics prior to the last election was working as the prior Liberal candidate's executive assistant for a few years (she wasn't participating in Municipal or Provincial government, is my point).

She isn't a career politician from a family of such. She hasn't been working in politics her entire adult life. And if her riding decides she's totally fucked up (she hasn't, this is hypothetical), they'll not vote for her next time. Happens constantly in Canadian politics. And it's just the few hundred thousand people in Kitchener/Waterloo that get to make that call, not anyone else in Canada. Our representatives are very much prone to being held to account by their ridings.

There can't be a "ruling class" when anyone can become or cease to be a member of such at the whims of their voters. Those politicians serve the population, they don't rule them. The capacity to enact laws collectively doesn't allow for such, because if it's not what the people want, they won't get re-elected, and future governments can overturn whatever's been done.

The American system isn't like this, for a host of reasons, some institutional, some cultural.

All we need is to ensure that the leaders are chosen from among the people, by the people, and have that leadership challenged regularly (via elections, typically). That eliminates any "ruling class", in practice, because they aren't a separate class.

[xChurch]

Well, it is exciting in a way... and "May you live in exciting times." is a curse, but it never boring...

True, there is an insane amount of potential for our species at this point. It's just hard to accept that during our lifetimes, one way or another, our world and our species will be forever changed in ways that would have been unthinkable just a few centuries ago. It's the one major self-made make it or break it chance humanity has or probably will ever get. And honestly...I worry what will happen, and I'm an optimist.

[Theodarzna]

So class war, climate change, rise of the machines, terrorism, global power struggles. Man...talk about being born at the wrong time.

There is no right time of history to be born into.

[xChurch]

There is no right time of history to be born into.

No, that is true, but we are at the point where we can have major global effects but still have some that don't accept it or don't care. In the past, we couldn't make those effects, and the in the future we'll hopefully be able to midigate the negitives. This is the point when things have the potential to get very unstable accross the globe in ways even WW2 didn't.

[xChurch]

Yeah, that is my worry as well. But I am sticking to the Stoic approach (or at least attempting to). I try to change what I have the power to in my life, and do not worry, or take as absurd, the things I cannot change. (that are negative).

My attempt, and success has been mixed, and fraught with bouts of depression. As of right now, I do not see any projection for a net good for the majority of the planet.

This is pretty much my attitude towards it as well. Though I have my concerns, I try not to torture myself about it. There is tons to be hopeful for so I just keep my fingers crossed we don't mess everything up too much. Science and technology can lead the way, we just have to make it that far.

[I Push Buttons]

That is absolutely painting Connal's sentiment in the worst possible light, and is actually very deleterious to people who need support.

Well we have a plethora of modern examples of how well-meaning western "uplifting" of oppressed/disenfranchised/suffering/etc., people goes awry.

Or do you consider the failed states that act as havens for extremists and the refugee crisis we have left in the wake of overthrowing Ba'athist Iraq and supporting the Arab Spring to be successes?

Forgive me, but I have grown tired of unsuccessful 'nation building' endeavors in the third world. And that is what all "aid" devolves into because these fledgling governments are incapable handling that aid and of sustaining themselves against the onslaught of extremists/warlords.

Sending food and medicine to some place like the Congo, for example, doesn't help when corrupt officials, warlords, rebels, etc., all take it from the people for themselves/their own gain and hand it out/sell it piecemeal. The only way to prevent that is intervention.

I am all for the US being the world police. I am not, however, in favor of us permanently occupying all of the failed states of the world to enforce Connal's idea "uplifting" their people.

[wheresmywoft]

What protection? You think you will own the military?

We have examples of wealth owning military powers right now. Do you think it can't?

- - - Updated - - -

For how long? And how long till said protection realizes they can kill one man and become the new ruler?

Unknown for how long, not saying forever, but that leg up won't melt away in a day.

They're essentially starting with commodities and combat resources at the time that money itself becomes undervalued.

[Macaquerie]

This article is sort of symbolic of the quasi-intellectual nationalist claptrap you see all over the internet these days, where it sounds all high falutin' and complex but really doesn't make any sense if you aren't blown away by the big words and actually think about what it's saying. The idea that the world is dominated by some elite of "professors, journalists, and nonprofit activists" is just absurd, none of these groups has any real pull or influence though each seems to be a convenient conservative bogeyman because each represents a way of life that no red-blooded 'Murican would be caught dead pursuing. And why exactly is it that all the people bitching about the global elite tend to be relatively well-to-do white people living in prosperous countries who would, by any reasonable definition, belong to the global elite they despise so much? The actual working class consists of the poor huddled masses in third world countries that provide most of the labor to sustain the lifestyles we enjoy, and most of them don't show any signs of revolting against the current world order anytime soon.

[Theodarzna]

No, that is true, but we are at the point where we can have major global effects but still have some that don't accept it or don't care. In the past, we couldn't make those effects, and the in the future we'll hopefully be able to midigate the negitives. This is the point when things have the potential to get very unstable accross the globe in ways even WW2 didn't.

Never before has the 1984 scenario been technically possibly on a planetary scale.

[Felya]

We have examples of wealth owning military powers right now. Do you think it can't?

No, we do not have those in US. They can, but it would require extreme changes to current law.

- - - Updated - - -

Never before has the 1984 scenario been technically possibly on a planetary scale.

It’s not 1984... the internet negates a lot of it. This Huxley, not Orwell... that’s actually the crux of the problem that lead to the misinformation campaign of Trump. You were scared of scarcity of information, but got picked off by it’s over abundance.

[Triks]

This article is sort of symbolic of the quasi-intellectual nationalist claptrap you see all over the internet these days, where it sounds all high falutin' and complex but really doesn't make any sense if you aren't blown away by the big words and actually think about what it's saying. The idea that the world is dominated by some elite of "professors, journalists, and nonprofit activists" is just absurd, none of these groups has any real pull or influence though each seems to be a convenient conservative bogeyman because each represents a way of life that no red-blooded 'Murican would be caught dead pursuing. And why exactly is it that all the people bitching about the global elite tend to be relatively well-to-do white people living in prosperous countries who would, by any reasonable definition, belong to the global elite they despise so much? The actual working class consists of the poor huddled masses in third world countries that provide most of the labor to sustain the lifestyles we enjoy, and most of them don't show any signs of revolting against the current world order anytime soon.

It's shocking how much people want to acknowledge Marx's criticism of capitalism without acknowledging his criticism of capitalism.

There will ALWAYS be class struggle in a capitalist system because capitalism is the system that produces the most wealth and the most inequality. Smart capitalists know that wealth redistribution keeps the masses at bay while dumb capitalists impose austerity and think that universal healthcare is bad. The biggest irony in all of this is the impoverished voting for dog-eats-dog capitalism (Brexit) and a corrupt businessman because the left in the UK and USA have been consistently awful for the last 10 years.

[Mormolyce]

Never before has the 1984 scenario been technically possibly on a planetary scale.

Normally I would scoff at the idea of increasingly dated mid-20th century post apocalyptic fiction being relevant, given how rooted it was in the legacy of WWII that's diminishing into the rear view mirror.

But then again, here we are dealing with the first signs of ethnocentric nationalism making a push into mainstream politics. So maybe the jackboots aren't so far off after all.

[Endus]

It's shocking how much people want to acknowledge Marx's criticism of capitalism without acknowledging his criticism of capitalism.

There will ALWAYS be class struggle in a capitalist system because capitalism is the system that produces the most wealth and the most inequality. Smart capitalists know that wealth redistribution keeps the masses at bay while dumb capitalists impose austerity and think that universal healthcare is bad. The biggest irony in all of this is the impoverished voting for dog-eats-dog capitalism (Brexit) and a corrupt businessman because the left in the UK and USA have been consistently awful for the last 10 years.

To make it just that much worse, the entire point of capitalism, as Adam Smith envisioned it, was to benefit the consumers. He specifically stated that in any case where the interests of the consumer and producer came into conflict, the state should side with the consumer;

Consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production; and the interest of the producer ought to be attended to, only so far as it may be necessary for promoting that of the consumer.

Capitalism was intended to be a system that benefited the consumers, not a system whereby the owners of the means of production took all the wealth and hosed the working classes. The laissez-faire form that's cropped up increasingly is itself a form of class warfare, driving wealth inequality up and leading directly to the marginalization of the consumer. This should be seen as contrary to proper capitalism.

Because the root purpose of any economic system is to allocate productivity in such a way as to benefit society. If it's not doing that, it's a failing economic system. It doesn't even matter if productivity is increasing; it isn't serving the fundamental purpose that economic systems are meant to serve. Benefiting the wealthy and choking off the spending capacity of your consumers isn't a path to prosperity, and certainly isn't to the benefit of those consumers.

Which just goes to show that for all people criticize Marx for getting things wrong about human nature, the father of Capitalism was just as off-base.

[Cthulhu 2020]

I agree that the growing economic divide needs addressing. But pretending nobody's talking about it is silly as hell.

It's mostly because this new brand of non-Trump-supporting but anti-liberal conservatives suddenly seem to believe that they invented the conversation about wealth inequality, when it's been being pointed to for... decades, and ignored by their type. And of course, as we all know, they've also tried to turn the conversation about the ruling elite into being about the liberal elite being at fault, and not the laissez-faire capitalists who have been prospering at the expense of the world for quite awhile now.

- - - Updated - - -

Normally I would scoff at the idea of increasingly dated mid-20th century post apocalyptic fiction being relevant, given how rooted it was in the legacy of WWII that's diminishing into the rear view mirror.

But then again, here we are dealing with the first signs of ethnocentric nationalism making a push into mainstream politics. So maybe the jackboots aren't so far off after all.

How DARE you imply that 1984 becoming a reality would be anything other than the fault of Hillary and her globalist shadow government! Especially in a Theo thread!

Lol

[wheresmywoft]

No, we do not have those in US. They can, but it would require extreme changes to current law.

Sure if you want to introduce constraints that only the US is being discussed.

That's somewhat dishonest.

[Felya]

Sure if you want to introduce constraints that only the US is being discussed.

That's somewhat dishonest.

Countries that have had military take overs, do not have the same class war issues, that are discussed in the OP. First world problem, yo...

[wheresmywoft]

Countries that have had military take overs, do not have the same class war issues, that are discussed in the OP. First world problem, yo...

Not once have I mentioned military take overs... The discussion was that the transition for the decline of society isn't a one day thing. The time that passes during such a transition has our current measures of wealth still holds value. It would allow for that wealth to be transitioned into items which would allow the formerly wealthy, to still hold measures of power and control once our current measure of wealth is invalidated. One of those being military capabilities.

[satimy]

Communism and Marxism are greater threats to humanity than Nazis or Jihadis. We failed because we thought the soviets controlled economy was a threat to us, when the real threat was the take over of schools, mass 3rd world immigration and negative propaganda against any sort of national unity.

[Jastall]

So class war, climate change, rise of the machines, terrorism, global power struggles. Man...talk about being born at the wrong time.

Meh, I think these problems are mostly overblown. No epoch is perfect; seventy years ago you'd have been born at the time of the worst wars and genocides in mankind's history. Fourty years ago you'd have been living in a time where two superpowers were at each other's throat and had the means to obliterate all life on the planet, while dozens of proxy wars claimed millions in the meantime. A hundred year ago, you would probably known someone, or several someones, who died of war or the Spanish flu. Three hundred years ago most of the world's population were slaves or serfs that lived all their life in backbreaking labor, never knowing anything else as their leaders called themselves enlightened monarchs. Two thousand years ago the most advanced empire in the world put people on crosses to ensure the most painful and exemplary death possible, and you were also probably a slave or a pleb.

Power struggles of all forms will be a thing so long as humans exist, and modern media gives an impression that the world is more volatile than ever. The truth is, before people just died and ceased to be talked about, these days in most cases violence is widely reported and no time in the history of making has seen more people be safer or more prosperous than now. It just happens that it is sadly not a general state of affair.

[Triks]

To make it just that much worse, the entire point of capitalism, as Adam Smith envisioned it, was to benefit the consumers. He specifically stated that in any case where the interests of the consumer and producer came into conflict, the state should side with the consumer;

Consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production; and the interest of the producer ought to be attended to, only so far as it may be necessary for promoting that of the consumer.

Capitalism was intended to be a system that benefited the consumers, not a system whereby the owners of the means of production took all the wealth and hosed the working classes. The laissez-faire form that's cropped up increasingly is itself a form of class warfare, driving wealth inequality up and leading directly to the marginalization of the consumer. This should be seen as contrary to proper capitalism.

Because the root purpose of any economic system is to allocate productivity in such a way as to benefit society. If it's not doing that, it's a failing economic system. It doesn't even matter if productivity is increasing; it isn't serving the fundamental purpose that economic systems are meant to serve. Benefiting the wealthy and choking off the spending capacity of your consumers isn't a path to prosperity, and certainly isn't to the benefit of those consumers.

Which just goes to show that for all people criticize Marx for getting things wrong about human nature, the father of Capitalism was just as off-base.

This is Economics 101 and it's frustrating that people still don't get it. The primary drivers of any economy are the upper-lower class, lower-middle class and middle-middle class as they are the most numerous. When you load your youth with crippling debt, when you starve your vital services of funds and when you start axing workers' rights you are just begging for trouble.