Thursday, August 25, 2011

Endangered species, the super-rich!

Democratic freedoms seem to mean different things to different people, as events in different countries show. On the recent riots in London, we posted the thought that, among the socially disadvantaged, long-term frustrations with systemic inequality, may have finally boiled over into displays of violent dissent.The taxpaying public affected by the unrest has had little sympathy for it; the super-rich has remained cocooned. 

To sections of society, the sudden budget cuts could have felt like the last straw in the suspension of civil rightsHowever, reader from UK argues that benefits have been the actual source of the problem, having largely nurtured grifters seeking to appropriate what they do not earn. Their freebies threatened, these people planned the criminal activities.

He shares with us his indignation:
In Britain we are faced with reducing a huge debt and everyone is paying the price… benefits are one of the causes of the debt in the first place … Here even those with nothing can achieve a better standard of living IF THEY CHOOSE TO WORK HARD but many don't [and] they choose to take money and do nothing. There are some who cannot achieve anything and need help but there are also many who just can't be bothered.
The perception there is not so much of spontaneity in the protests, as of deliberately orchestrated lawlessness. Organized groups of criminal elements fanned out to stretch police resources thin, so that the looting could continue without inference. 


Our incensed reader adds:
… it's a good thing I'm not mayor of London otherwise I think I may have used Chinese or Syrian tactics and issued machine guns to the police and told them to fire at the knees and then arrested those people in hospital.
The palpable disgust of the salaried class probably stems from the economic pressures placed on them. In the dodgy economy, they are asked to share sacrifices with austerity measures. They carry the brunt of the tax burden, and as they see it, it is their contributions that ensure survival of the non-payers.

Powers-that-be perceive broken sections in society. They do not however, perceive the sustained political and corporate contributions to the moral collapse. The general solution resolved seems to be to stamp out the gangs with stiff sentencing of the looters caught on camera, and further cuts in their benefits.

But these stern measures would do nothing to address the searing sense of deprivation. Rather, the administration’s iron hand would underscore their disconnect with the ordinary population - pejoratively, the underclass. The social alienation that already exists may even be compounded as criminality in the targeted groups.

Meanwhile political establishments tend to coddle their super-rich. The tax payments of the moneyed class are minimal, which bloats their returns on investments. This tacit political support of the social hierarchy has widens its divides, with the rich simply getting richer. Billionaires in fact, are protected as if they are endangered species.

Warren Buffet comments:
OUR leaders have asked for “shared sacrifice.” But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched. While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks … 

The Western perspective generally is pro-business, and the prevailing social climate relentlessly projects consumerism. Media entertainment and advertising tend to portray acquisitions as the most important goal in life, at the expense of honest human achievement.  

Booker points out:
Today, whenever my world-weary eyes alight on a "youth show" it merely resembles a glossily edited advert for celebrity lifestyles, co-starring a jet-ski and a tower of gold. And regardless of the time slot, every other commercial shrieks that I deserve the best of everything. I and I alone.
When sensation and consumption pervades the environment around them, few can escape the social learning. Consumerism burns in the hearts of the have-nots, especially the youth, although they have not the ready means to fulfill wants. It needed but a slight push to tip over the building dissatisfaction - and so it happened in the mass looting of consumer goods.

Severe punishments hardly come across as the best way to fix what seems broken in the emotional mind. Ordinary residents in parts of the city are instead applying a much more novel balm to social wounds – they continue to adorn walls with post-it notes. Placed on damaged buildings by the community’s silent majority, the messages form a mosaic of human feelings. Social psychologists consider the visual impact of the daubs of colour the critical, public counteraction to aggression.

Barford reports:
"Charming, sentimental, concerned, non-destructive, clever, responsible and recyclable, these Post-it messages represent very different values to those so atrociously revealed last week … human beings use visual markings to claim areas - so people are partly reclaiming their streets by putting down a territorial element" …

The completely non-threatening message boards not only invite participation, they also spread comfort and solidarity among the people, healing the trauma. During the riots, many individuals lost touch with themselves, as violence became their only way to communicate. The walls of love, with their reminders of eternal human values, may serve to relocate communities.

The super-rich of the land also need reminding that citizenship is an important social responsibility. In place of selfish self-interest and extraordinary breaks, they need to exercise their democratic freedoms to sacrifice and share with the less fortunate others of society. Perhaps then the pains of social divides may cease, and us-and-them groupings be rendered obsolete in Diversity. 


References for this post:

  1. England riots: What are the Post-it note 'love walls' all about?bbc.co.uk. BBC News. 17 August 2011. 
  2. Booker, Charlie. “How to prevent more riotsguardian.co.uk. The Guardian. 14 August 2011. 
  3. Buffet, Warren E. “Stop Coddling the Super-Richnytimes.com. The New York Times. August 14, 2011. 
  4. England riots: Broken society is top priority – Cameronbbc.co.uk. BBC News. 15 August 2011. 
  5. Gilligan, Andrew. “London riots were orchestrated by outsiders” telegraph.co.uk. The Telegraph. 21 Aug 2011. 
  6. Power, Nina. “There is a context to London's riots that can't be ignoredguardian.co.uk. The Guardian. 8 August 2011.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

An interesting article which seems to be coming from a socialist point of view. In my opinion most people, who start life with very little, have a socialist attitude that says “those that have should give some of it to everyone else (me)”. As people earn more and get a better standard of living and more possessions their opinion tends to move to the right and they then think “those who have a lot more than me should share it BUT I don’t think I should share what I have worked for with those who don’t work”.

As people get older and have possessions like their own owned homes, cars their belief in sharing their hard work with others reduces but they still think the super-rich could afford to share a bit. Beliefs often follow the person’s perceived status in life.

I am not aware of the tax benefits afforded to the super-rich. All I can say is that anyone earning £150,000 or more (wages or return on investments) is subject to a 50% tax and those earning over £35,000 pay 40% tax, which seems quite a lot for a government who don’t contribute to the wealth gathering population. In fact the recent parliamentary expenses scandal suggests that MPs have it very easy, with our money.

I’m sorry but those who steel and those who cause damage to other people’s property should be punished. Rather than jail perhaps they should be made to repair the damage and pay for it with work within the community so the general public can see who they are and that they are paying the price for what they did. I think the things they stole should be taken back and if they have sold them then they have to work to pay for the goods.

I think that the perpetrators should have their pictures put up with the post-it notes so everyone knows who they are. That may, of course, give them notoriety which may just boost their standing in the gang but when they are seen working to make the community better that may knock their standing.