A trillionaire does not represent the triump of human potential

This is a difficult article to quote because it's all so good. I encourage you to go and read it in its entirety.

I have always been against hierarchy and extreme forms of wealth. As this article explains, although not in the part I've quoted below, that makes me an anarchist, because I see "concentrated wealth and concentrated power [as] inseparable" and meaning that I "reject the distinction often made between economic and political authority".

If your natural reaction to someone calling themselves an "anarchist" is to flinch and be suspicious of them, this is the perfect example of that concentrated wealth and power doing its job. I dare you to read some texts from The Anarchist Library and disagree with the basic tenets of anarchism. I dare you.

A trillionaire does not represent the triumph of human potential. It represents a historic failure of human society. The existence of a trillionaire demonstrates that the wealth produced by countless workers has been concentrated into the hands of one individual on a scale without precedent. It reveals a world where economic power has become so centralised that a single person can command resources greater than those available to many nations. It exposes the absurdity of a system that struggles to house, feed, educate, and care for billions while allowing one man to accumulate wealth beyond any conceivable personal use. The question is not whether Elon Musk deserves a trillion dollars. The question is how any human being can possess such wealth while millions remain trapped in poverty and insecurity.

[...]

Musk’s rise also reveals how modern capitalism has transformed celebrity into an economic force. Earlier generations of industrialists often remained distant figures. Today’s billionaires cultivate public identities. They present themselves as rebels, outsiders, innovators, or visionaries. Social media has allowed wealthy individuals to bypass traditional gatekeepers and communicate directly with millions. This creates a dangerous illusion. People begin to identify with billionaires rather than with their fellow workers. Workers earning ordinary wages defend the interests of men whose fortunes exceed the economic output of entire countries. People struggling with rent celebrate stock market gains that bring them no benefit. Citizens facing stagnant wages cheer the accumulation of wealth that deepens social inequality. The billionaire becomes a character in a story rather than a participant in a class relationship.

[...]

Capitalism rewards ownership far more generously than contribution. A nurse contributes more to society than a hedge fund manager. A sanitation worker contributes more to public health than a venture capitalist. A teacher contributes more to human development than a speculator. Yet wealth flows overwhelmingly toward ownership rather than social usefulness. This contradiction lies at the heart of the system. The trillionaire embodies it in its most extreme form.

[...]

The wealthy are not our role models. They are not proof that the system works. They are proof of who the system works for. A trillionaire is not the symbol of a successful society. A trillionaire is the symbol of a society that has allowed wealth, power, and human possibility to be monopolised by a tiny ruling class while the vast majority produce the world and receive only a fraction of what they create. The proper response is neither envy nor admiration. It is opposition.

---

Source: theslowburningfuse.wordpress.com
Are.na block: ↗
Collection: finds-au723pdfugg