An economic religion is one based not on the amount of poverty it is directly or indirectly responsible for creating and spreading far and wide, which of course should be the only criterion by which all religions are most pragmatically judged, but on how well it can sell the majority of a population the fantasy that they may one day become rich, even if the majority of the people within such a system have a far better chance of winning the lottery than they do of ever becoming rich.
Instead, we focus not on how much poverty is accumulating on the bottom, both physically and mentally, but on an ever growing Everest of wealth which builds up like a festering dung heap in Ghenna, which only casts a darker and darker shadow over all of life on the planet.
This is especially true when you consider that the inflationary nature of money means two things:
1) that "being rich" is not a fixed price point, but one that continually increases with compound interest
2) which means that anyone who is simply treading water to survive, which is an increasing number of people around the world, is actually only farther and farther behind.
The idea of that you can slowly turn up the temperature on a pot of water with a frog in it, and the frog will never notice it is being slowly boiled alive, because it simply learns to adjust to the temperature of the water until it eventually boils alive, is using the frog to describe the middle class. It's the middle class, of course, that must be convinced that the complaints from those classes below them are all completely unfounded, which is exactly what the middle class largely "believes" to be true, at least until they find themselves ultimately making the same complaints they had dismissed as naive earlier.
Humans being a bit more complicated than frogs, of course, the way you do this then is through propaganda. In a Communist system like that of Josef Stalin, that propaganda all comes from one source, which makes it so easy to spot. But in a Capitalist system, that propaganda comes from everywhere, public and private alike. And while both the private and the public sectors are best of friends backstage, behind the curtain, they know to act like arch enemies whenever they're in the ring (which happens to be your screen).
After all, it was the private sector that overthrew King George, before it built the public sector, which in turn created the feudal lords of the private sector, "in their own image," which today we call corporations and other multinational organizations. And today the latter are overthrowing the former, the same way the Federal government subjugated those states from which it was birthed for daring to claim the authority of a parent, through the Civil War.
Amen.
Comments
Post a Comment