This piece at The Atlantic, The Rise of the New Global Elite, left me scratching my head. The writer devotes in excess of 7000 words to making a case of immoral elites and the system of inequalities that makes such behaviors possible. The article provides a long list of pretty reprehensible statements (i.e. a new rich Wall Street type complaining that 20 Million is only 10 Mill after taxes). And then, when it is clear that these people are profiting from their access to wealth in ways that are not available to those in lower social strata (they all blame the middle classes for the financial meltdown, for instance, saying their reckless consumption justified the crisis and loss of jobs/homes), we are presented with a series of closing paragraphs that includes this gem:
And, ultimately, that is the dilemma: America really does need many of its plutocrats. We benefit from the goods they produce and the jobs they create. And even if a growing portion of those jobs are overseas, it is better to be the home of these innovators—native and immigrant alike—than not. In today’s hypercompetitive global environment, we need a creative, dynamic super-elite more than ever.
Eh. Up to that point, more than six thousand words to describe a socioeconomic class that, going by what the article presents, seems deserving of a Marxist type comeuppance. And then we are told we need them? Strange, strange ways to create empathy.
For the past decade and a half I have been making all my content available for free (and never behind a paywall) as an ongoing practice of ephemeral publishing. This site is no exception. If you wish to help offset my labor costs, you can donate on Paypal or you can subscribe to Patreon where I will not be putting my posts behind a lock but you'd be helping me continue making this work available for everyone. Thank you. Follow me on Twitter for new post updates.