20 years ago, I had to look up what an Oligarch was; the same with Plutocrat. They were words I had heard, and had a sense of their meaning, but not a real understanding of them.
- Oligarchy (from Ancient Greek ὀλιγαρχία (oligarkhía) ‘rule by few’; from ὀλίγος (olígos) ‘few’ and ἄρχω (árkhō) ‘to rule, command’)[1][2][3] is a form of government in which power rests with a small number of people. These people may or may not be distinguished by one or several characteristics, such as nobility, fame, wealth, education, or corporate, religious, political, or military control.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy
- A plutocracy (from Ancient Greek πλοῦτος (ploûtos) ‘wealth’ and κράτος (krátos) ‘power’) or plutarchy is a society that is ruled or controlled by people of great wealth or income. The first known use of the term in English dates from 1631.[1] Unlike most political systems, plutocracy is not rooted in any established political philosophy.[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy
Oligarchs back then were, it seemed, confined to Russia, rising from the disintegration of the USSR. Strongmen from the KGB who took control of vast state assets, in a lawless free for all.
Since then, this class has expanded, in origin of wealth and geographical location, at least in our recognition of these individuals, a sub-class of the hierarchy of so-called High Net Worth Individuals (HNWIs).
- In the financial services industry, a high-net-worth individual (HNWI) is a person who maintains liquid assets at or above a certain threshold. Typically the criterion is that the person’s financial assets (excluding their primary residence) are valued over US$1 million.[1][2] A secondary level, a very-high-net-worth individual (VHNWI), is someone with a net worth of at least US$5 million.[1] The terminal level, an ultra-high-net-worth individual (UHNWI), holds US$30 million in investible assets (adjusted for inflation).[3][4] Individuals with a net worth of over US$1 billion are considered to occupy a special bracket of the UHNWI.[2][5] These thresholds are broadly used in studies of wealth inequality, government regulation, investment suitability requirements, marketing, financing standards, and general corporate strategy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-net-worth_individual
They are known to us now. The Billionaires.
Their path to such remarkable wealth may be less brutal than those of the old-school oligarchs of the former soviet union, or it may lie in a distributed, generalised brutality
- Forced labor in the technology industry supply chain refers to the exploitation of workers involved in producing and distributing technology products and services https://www.z2data.com/insights/what-is-forced-labor-in-the-technology-industry-supply-chain
What is clear is that powerful interests have occupied, polluted, the political sphere, to further their interests, at the cost of everyone outside their class. This is generally true of the left and right regions of the political spectrum.
The empirical evidence is that wealth inequality is growing; and is unlikely to stop. It follows then, that the effects will gradually be felt by people higher up the socioeconomic scale, as the available resources at the lower end are depleted.
By way of illustration, HNWIs are closer to the person on median income than they are to a billionaire.
Median Earner: £37,000
HNWI: £1,000,000
Billionaire: £1,000,000,000
The rise of the Billionaire class, and the shift from late-stage capitalism to the dawn of neo-feudalism requires us to redefine the proletariat from its strict Marxist perspective.
- The proletariat (/ˌproʊlɪˈtɛəriət/; from Latin proletarius ‘producing offspring’) is the social class of wage-earners, those members of a society whose possession of significant economic value is their labour power (their capacity to work).[1] A member of such a class is a proletarian or a proletaire. Marxist philosophy regards the proletariat under conditions of capitalism as an exploited class[2] forced to accept meager wages in return for operating the means of production, which belong to the class of business owners, the bourgeoisie.
Karl Marx argued that this capitalist oppression gives the proletariat common economic and political interests that transcend national boundaries,[3] impelling them to unite and to take over power from the capitalist class, and eventually to create a socialist society free from class distinctions.[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proletariat
- Neo-feudalism or new feudalism is a theorized contemporary rebirth of policies of governance, economy, and public life, reminiscent of those which were present in many feudal societies. Such aspects include, but are not limited to: Unequal rights and legal protections for common people and for nobility,[1] dominance of societies by a small and powerful elite, a lack of social mobility, and relations of lordship and serfdom between the elite and the people, where the former are rich and the latter poor.[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-feudalism
Though perhaps well-intentioned in the first instance, Identity Politics has effectively served to atomise the working public – wage earners (and those who are not able to work). There is a growing sense that the Liberal experiment has failed.
- Identity politics is politics based on a particular identity, such as ethnicity, race, nationality, religion, denomination, gender, sexual orientation, social background, caste, age, disability, intelligence, and social class. The term encompasses various often-populist political phenomena and rhetoric, such as governmental migration policies that regulate mobility and opportunity based on identities, left-wing agendas involving intersectional politics or class reductionism, and right-wing nationalist agendas of exclusion of national or ethnic “others.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_politics
- Liberalism has Failed Catherine Liu and Chris Hedges talk about the difference between the professional managerial class of the past versus today, and detail how the liberal class has betrayed workers for seats within the halls of oligarchic power.
I believe that we are now faced with the challenge of reuniting, as a disparate group of identities, politics, ethnicity, gender, sexual identity, net-worth, and all the other things that have until now divided us, to find our shared humanity. The coming challenges are subtly embodied by the dominance of technology in our lives, our devices, the apps, how we consume.
How many of us pay to use email? Very few, I believe. The old truism holds, though: If the service is free, then you are the product.
- If You’re Not Paying For It, You Become The Product
The internet continues to evolve and with it our privacy continues to be a matter of debate. It was once taken for granted by people who worked in advertising that a person’s privacy was paramount. Then some advertisers broke that trust and thereafter came the annoying phone calls during the dinner hour. In the last few years our private lives have been inundated with junk mail and our mailboxes real and virtual are filled to the tipping point with brand magazines and offers. https://www.forbes.com/sites/marketshare/2012/03/05/if-youre-not-paying-for-Bit-you-become-the-product
The majority of our online interactions leave us feeling exposed. Most of us have experienced the unsettling sensation that our smartphones are listening in on our conversations; the fact that they are capable of collecting our data without resorting to such tactics offers little consolation.
- Is my phone listening to me? New report leads to worry that devices are snooping
A new report claims that a company has finally admitted that our phones are really listening to us to send us targeted advertising. https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/is-my-phone-listening-to-me-ad-microphone-privacy-b2606445.html
We can, however, begin to disentangle ourselves from this monetisation of our personal data, and this goes hand-in-hand with resisting the rise of the billionaire class. To be clear, politics will not save us.
On the technology side, this will require some intent, a shift in paradigm, perhaps a little money (though not necessarily). It will require us to ask ourselves what we really need, to understand the difference between ‘need’ and ‘want’, and to adopt a little discipline into our digital lives.
For example, no one teaches us how to manage an email inbox, sort out our digital clutter. I have 33, 000 email messages in ONE of my old mail (Gmail) accounts – most of which are unread. Thankfully, my work email account is way less than 100. But I have been disciplined in managing that account – no one needs terabytes of email – so it is quite possible for me to manage with a paid-for account.
I hope that proletaria.org will grow into a virtual space that can support community and resistance.
Thank you for reading.