you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]NeoRail[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

This is something that depends entirely on the degree of atomisation in a given society. In a zero-sum, every man for himself type of environment, the logical thing to do for the 1% would be to ruthlessly exploit the 99%. The issue is that it is very difficult to have anything resembling a functional society that way. If the two groups share a sense of social belonging and justice, then long term arrangements can be reached that are much more mutually beneficial and sustainable.

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I've just come from seeing someone mentioning "the ruling class" on dot win being called a communist...

Anyway, I think there are a number of perspectives the 1% could hold that wouldn't necessitate a zero-sum situation to see the 99% as a resource to be exploited.

Some of those could result from awareness of the 5+ billion excess people on the planet. In which case, a large percentage of the 99% could be seen as the enemies of mankind. Somewhat similar to 118 people in a 27 person life raft.

Another perspective might be that people get what they deserve, as the natural consequence of their choices and behaviors.

If the two groups share a sense of social belonging and justice

I would be fairly shocked if that were the case.

then long term arrangements can be reached that are much more mutually beneficial and sustainable.

We're not in a sustainable situation on this planet, and our species is heading towards bankruptcy. Either our average lifestyles need to drastically lower, or a very large number of people need to gtfo.

People who spend their days laboring to earn money are less likely to spend their time thinking about those kinds of things. But this is just about possible different perspectives, not whether the 1% might be a major cause of our problems.