I don't really think that's possible, because there is no difference between "the people" and..."the not-people"?
Every time there's any discussion about politics or power, there's the inevitable topic of "us" vs "them". It's always insightful to ask people where they draw the line between the categories of people. Is it all politicians? I mean, is there some secret indoctrination, like Scientology, whereby the minute you reach a certain level in your political career, the "real world" is explained to you? How is it that these secrets are kept?
For many Americans it's the "1%ers" who receive the disdain. That is, until they realize that a significant number of themselves are global 1%ers. I have a personal friend who often rails about the "global elite", meanwhile he is a SMB owner with a multi-million dollar net worth who isn't -- how shall I say it -- especially "diligent" when it comes to offering his low-skill employees the best opportunities.
All this is to say that, yes, often times the incentives of the capitalists and the workers are averse to each other. But "the system" maintains the balance, in that one party can't subjugate the other extremely without personal harm. In other words, "the rich" can't take all the money, because that leaves no demand for product, and eventually "the poor" say @#$% it, and start beheading the royals. At least that's what history tells me.
It's entirely plausible that some things are "kept safe" from the whims of the people.
In fact, that's the reason that the US is a republic, not a democracy - to keep things (somewhat) safe from the whims of the people, and yet to create a system where, if the people want it enough, they'll get it.
And yes, if the people want it enough, they will in fact get it in the US. It's just that the media amplifies screaming. Those who scream are much more often in the minority than the media makes them appear.
Comments
But possibly not within what people call "the system." It's entirely plausible that some things are "kept safe" from the whims of the people.
I don't really think that's possible, because there is no difference between "the people" and..."the not-people"?
Every time there's any discussion about politics or power, there's the inevitable topic of "us" vs "them". It's always insightful to ask people where they draw the line between the categories of people. Is it all politicians? I mean, is there some secret indoctrination, like Scientology, whereby the minute you reach a certain level in your political career, the "real world" is explained to you? How is it that these secrets are kept?
For many Americans it's the "1%ers" who receive the disdain. That is, until they realize that a significant number of themselves are global 1%ers. I have a personal friend who often rails about the "global elite", meanwhile he is a SMB owner with a multi-million dollar net worth who isn't -- how shall I say it -- especially "diligent" when it comes to offering his low-skill employees the best opportunities.
All this is to say that, yes, often times the incentives of the capitalists and the workers are averse to each other. But "the system" maintains the balance, in that one party can't subjugate the other extremely without personal harm. In other words, "the rich" can't take all the money, because that leaves no demand for product, and eventually "the poor" say @#$% it, and start beheading the royals. At least that's what history tells me.
In fact, that's the reason that the US is a republic, not a democracy - to keep things (somewhat) safe from the whims of the people, and yet to create a system where, if the people want it enough, they'll get it.
And yes, if the people want it enough, they will in fact get it in the US. It's just that the media amplifies screaming. Those who scream are much more often in the minority than the media makes them appear.