[P2P-F] Fwd: THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING - RECONSIDERED

[Michel Bauwens]

-


On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:14 AM, albert lundquist <agltucs1 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Privilege, Pathology and Power
>
> <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/paulkrugman/index.html>
>
> Paul Krugman <http://www.nytimes.com/column/paul-krugman> JAN. 1, 2016
>  1864 COMMENTS
>
>
>
> Wealth can be bad for your soul. That’s not just a hoary piece of folk
> wisdom; it’s a conclusion from serious social science
> <http://healthland.time.com/2013/08/20/wealthy-selfies-how-being-rich-increases-narcissism/>,
> confirmed by statistical analysis and experiment. The affluent are, on
> average, less likely to exhibit empathy, less likely to respect norms and
> even laws, more likely to cheat, than those occupying lower rungs on the
> economic ladder.
>
> And it’s obvious, even if we don’t have statistical confirmation, that
> extreme wealth can do extreme spiritual damage. Take someone whose
> personality might have been merely disagreeable under normal circumstances,
> and give him the kind of wealth that lets him surround himself with
> sycophants and usually get whatever he wants. It’s not hard to see how he
> could become almost pathologically self-regarding and unconcerned with
> others.Wealth can be bad for your soul. That’s not just a hoary piece of
> folk wisdom; it’s a  statistical analysis and experiment. The affluent are,
> on average, less likely to exhibit empathy, less likely to respect norms
> and even laws, more likely to cheat, than those occupying lower rungs on
> the economic ladder.
>
> So what happens to a nation that gives ever-growing political power to the
> superrich?
>
>
> Modern America is a society in which a growing share of income and wealth
> is concentrated in the hands of a small number of people, and these people
> have huge political influence — in the early stages of the 2016
> presidential campaign, around half the contributions
> <http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/11/us/politics/2016-presidential-election-super-pac-donors.html> came
> from fewer than 200 wealthy families. The usual concern about this march
> toward oligarchy is that the interests and policy preferences of the very
> rich are quite different from those of the population at large, and that is
> surely the biggest problem.
>
> But it’s also true that those empowered by money-driven politics include a
> disproportionate number of spoiled egomaniacs. Which brings me to the
> current election cycle.
>
> The most obvious illustration of the point I’ve been making is the man now
> leading the Republican field. Donald Trump would probably have been a
> blowhard and a bully whatever his social station. But his billions have
> insulated him from the external checks that limit most people’s ability to
> act out their narcissistic tendencies; nobody has ever been in a position
> to tell him, “You’re fired!” And the result is the face you keep seeing on
> your TV.
>
> But Mr. Trump isn’t the only awesomely self-centered billionaire playing
> an outsized role in the 2016 campaign.
>
> There have been some interesting news reports lately about Sheldon
> Adelson, the Las Vegas gambling magnate. Mr. Adelson has been involved in
> some fairly complex court proceedings, which revolve around claims of
> misconduct in his operations in Macau, including links to organized crime
> and prostitution. Given his business, this may not be all that surprising.
> What was surprising was his behavior in court
> <http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/judge-adelson-lawsuit-subject-unusual-scrutiny-amid-review-journal-sale>,
> where he refused to answer routine questions and argued with the judge,
> Elizabeth Gonzales. That, as she rightly pointed out, isn’t something
> witnesses get to do.
>
> Then Mr. Adelson bought Nevada’s largest newspaper. As the sale was being
> finalized, reporters at the paper were told to drop everything and start
> monitoring all activity of three judges, including Ms. Gonzales. And while
> the paper never published any results from that investigation, an attack on
> Judge Gonzales, with what looks like a fictitious byline, did appear in a
> small Connecticut newspaper owned by one of Mr. Adelson’s associates.
>
> O.K., but why do we care? Because Mr. Adelson’s political spending has
> made him a huge player in Republican politics — so much so that reporters
> routinely talk about the “Adelson primary
> <https://www.yahoo.com/politics/millions-at-stake-the-adelson-primary-is-neck-125553624.html>,”
> in which candidates trek to Las Vegas to pay obeisance.
>
>
>
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/01/opinion/privilege-pathology-and-power.html#story-continues-7>Are
> there other cases? Yes indeed, even if the egomania doesn’t rise to Adelson
> levels. I find myself thinking, for example, of the hedge-fund billionaire
> Paul Singer, another big power in the G.O.P., who published an investor’s
> letter declaring that inflation was running rampant
> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/11/06/heres-the-latest-dumb-argument-from-a-billionaire-that-will-hurt-the-economy/> —
> he could tell from the prices of Hamptons real estate and high-end art.
> Economists got some laughs out of the incident, but think of the
> self-absorption required to write something like that without realizing how
> it would sound to non-billionaires.
> 1864COMMENTS
>
> Or think of the various billionaires
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/20/opinion/krugman-pathos-of-the-plutocrat.html> who,
> a few years ago, were declaring with straight faces, and no sign of
> self-awareness, that President Obama was holding back the economy by
> suggesting that some business people had misbehaved. You see, he was
> hurting their feelings.
>
> Just to be clear, the biggest reason to oppose the power of money in
> politics is the way it lets the wealthy rig the system and distort policy
> priorities. And the biggest reason billionaires hate Mr. Obama is what he
> did to their taxes
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/31/upshot/thanks-obama-highest-earners-tax-rates-rose-sharply-in-2013.html>,
> not their feelings. The fact that some of those buying influence are also
> horrible people is secondary.
>
> But it’s not trivial. Oligarchy, rule by the few, also tends to become
> rule by the monstrously self-centered. Narcisstocracy? Jerkigarchy? Anyway,
> it’s an ugly spectacle, and it’s probably going to get even uglier over the
> course of the year ahead.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20160105/bbc20eed/attachment-0001.htm