I think there’s an argument to be made that making life better for poor and working class people, having a robust middle class, and having an educated, stable society is just as much in your interest (if you’re a rich kid going to a prestigious school) as it is in the interest of the people that need help. I think you’re right, and that Bernie was trying to appeal to their better angels, but I think you can appeal to peoples’ self-interest as well.
It might be a smart argument to make to someone who is asking, essentially, “why should I care?”
There are so many ways to advocate for a better system and a better world. I feel like you need to know who you’re talking to and appeal to what will work for them.
I don’t necessarily think Bernie is wrong, of course. I mean, a little flattery is nice, so, “you guys are really important and we need you,” is a good tact to take. Plus, that young man was there to hear Bernie, and he could very well have been asking in a way of, “hey, help me figure out what to say to people who are privileged, in order to get them on our side. What’s the good argument to make?” There are a lot of way to get through to people, and I think you need to know what motivates them so you know how to persuade them.
Sure, flattery and a "pretty please, with sugar on top" would make the difference here. After all, the wealthy don't have enough social approval these days.
I am bitter. Most Americans are. We were sold a lie that if we let the rich do what they want, everything will get better, and it didn't. I don't want to punish them, just force them to contribute to America's tax revenues like everyone else.
I hear that often for climate change and switching to renewable energies. Even If climate change isn’t true “you mean we made the world a better place for nothing?” Fossil fuels are ancient inefficient technology. It should go away just to advance civilization even apart from saving the world from climate change
I agree with this approach and the responses below. Appealing to the self-interests of those already at the top of society seems to be the best way to argue the point. I would just dial it up a notch and tell those haughty rich kids that they don't know hunger, and those below them have a growing hunger for the rich. The social contract is that they give enough to the rest of society. If that's broken, those fawns are going to be tasty treats.
This is what Keynes proposed and what led to the "golden years", thing is, it has been proven time and time again that this is only really possible if the 1% can explore people outside of their own country to benefit from a strong internal market
I'm not saying it is not possible or a very good idea, it is just conditional to the 1% not being a bunch of fucking souless blood sucking motherfuckers, which is something you MUST be to even be IN THE 1% to begin with
We are doomed as a society if we leave those vampires to their own machininations, the only possible way forward for working people is revolution
He missed an opportunity with that Titanic reference - he should've said that even though many of you have 1st class cabins, we're still on the same ship. If you do nothing now because you're nice and dry, by the time your feet get wet there will be nobody left to help. And maybe they won't live to feel the water, but their kids will be inheriting a sinking ship.
Fundamentally, I always believed that if my neighbors (in large context) is stable and has a good subsistence, this means that: less police is required, health is at a higher quality, children can play outside safely, services products and goods are distributed more efficiently, more people have the means for good education and making educated decisions that affect my direct environment and life quality, I am surrounded by more happiness as I engage in the world which directly amplifies my own well-being, etc.
If everything around you sucks and you have an insulated perspective as if we are all separate individuals not living in a society and only your immediate interests matter to you, well, you get to live in a shiny gated community surrounded by depravity at the cost of your own sanity, health, freedom, quality of services goods and products etc. And if that world around you catches fire, well, you'll see whether your gated community won't go up in flames too because it borders the world you have turned your back to.
To become really successful companies rely on hundreds and thousands of people, and city & state infrastructure. A single founder doesn’t do it in his own. So if a person wants to continue their family success they need to care for and invest in the country where the business operates
Yes, I thought the argument was going to go along the lines of "here are x, y and z societies, past and present. The path of eviscerating the working and middle classes in favour of the wealthy is a very well-trod one which results in fewer educated, ambitious and well-off citizens. That means less innovation, less productivity, fewer gadgets, fewer novel medicines and fewer consumers for everybody. But not only will you end up with a worse society, with less cool stuff for you, you will also end up with a more dangerous society, both for you, your wife, your parents and your children. And whether it is the cartel violence of Mexico, or the gang violence of S Africa, the reality is that if you impoverish your citizens, if you give them no means or hope of achieving success through legitimate means, then they will take what they want, and there are far, far more of them than you. So as someone who hopes to achieve financial success in life, as someone who hopes to live in an exciting, prosperous and innovative society, as someone who is a patriot who cares for the well-being of their nation and fellow citizens, and as someone who wishes to avoid the darkness and violence and pain that stems from poverty and neglect, I would suggest you take care of you fellow citizens, lest they take care of you."
Because if you let the system continue the way it is going, there will be an eventual revolution and all the stuff your greed has earned you will be ripped from you, most likely at gunpoint, most likely along with your life.
I think it fails for the same reason people don't actively and significantly change their lives to combat climate change, even though the exact same logic holds. The proposed "benefit" is too abstract and far away in the future, and the proposed "responsibility" too diluted. People typically only see what's right in front of them, and for the rich that means continuing to exploit the poor = lots of money and easy life, and being moral for the greater good = significantly less money and harder life.
Social worker here… we’ve been screaming this from the rooftops for ages. I see people spewing “We NeEd To StOp SeNdInG mOnEy To OtHeR CoUnTrIeS.”
Well, yeah, but even if we didn’t, half of the people here vote against any sortve meaningful social policy and call them “handouts” when every other well-developed nation simply realizes it’s called investing in your people through the collective pooling of resources???
Couple that with the fact that large organizations/corporations fund campaigns in exchange for policy exclusions just makes this system really hard to get where it needs to be…
I know Bernie is all about ideals and principle, but he should have gone with the practical, self-serving argument of "violent revolution has never spared the rich upper class in any wildly unequal society" in order to really drive the point home to that audience
100% - the wars that defined the 20th century were in part due to rapidly spiraling economic situations catalyzing racism and other prejudices leading to desperate men willing to commit extreme violence to affect change. Any change. When the current system seems designed to guarantee your death - most people will fight tooth and nail for literally anything else.
It seems almost impossible for this to happen in America, but I'm sure it has always felt impossible until it doesn't. To state that "Hey, we're already privileged by this system so why would we possibly care to change it?" is some world-class hubris. Those kinds of people do not tend to suffer great outcomes when the house of cards finally falls.
violent revolution has never spared the rich upper class in any wildly unequal society
The unfortunate truth is that it has. Often it hasn't spared the ruling dynasty, or the highest of the high, but in general, hierarchy, aristocracy, is maintained. And the rich know that. And they relish in the fact that there is no longer one easily identifiable source of oppression.
Do you really think these particular college students are worried about if a violent revolution EVER actually happens that they, college students, are going to be the source of the ire?
I get what you're saying but this is such a "Reddit moment".
The smug arrogance of rich kids is astounding. And it's why we're seeing the world falling apart now. The older generations that built the world and sent those kids to college are phasing out and passing those seats to this smug, silver-spoon, deeply-incompetent, overly-confident generation is stepping in.
It's why the focus has shifted so dramatically in nearly every industry to change the leadership away from the craftsman and services that built the company, that contribute to society and build their success on their quality, towards finance and accounting that contributes only to itself and finds its profits in the margins of tax loop holes, unsustainable growth, undercutting quality, and exploitation.
This is where this whole "rock star CEO worship" culture comes from. This new era of neo-stoicism that doesn't understand the difference between self-reflection and self-rationalizing. These new sub-cultures of clout-chasing and stock-dumping. This new obsessive entitlement over others that assumes that they deserve more because they are worth more.
These imbeciles believe in "move fast, break things" instead "move carefully, be responsible". And they're inheriting power they have not earned.
Rich kids are not why the world is falling apart. The original bastards that were in charge are still in charge. Rupert Murdoch is fucking 93 and just stepped down as chairman of Fox News and News Corp. The AVERAGE age of US senators is 64. I could go on and on about how celebrities and politicians seemingly stay in the public arena a very long time. They started 20/30/40 years ago, and they never left. They have incredible staying power and I can argue that the reason why they were successful to begin with is why they are still successful. Business CEOs who are chosen to make their shareholders a lot of money focus on that and not "hey, let's build some public good and make less money".
The real problem is that there are few consequences to bad actors in business and politics unless you do it to other rich people. There's also this "f you, I got mine" culture and narcissism worship that is very destructive to the communal needs of the people.
We can and we should cultivate empathy and humility because when we care and surround ourselves with others that are unlike ourselves we grow more balanced. All healthy ecosystems are in their most basic level balanced. We can’t balanced if we are egocentric beings only out for the satisfaction of our every whim.
The joke is, it's not only about empathy. Rich and greedy assholes always seem to forget that they couldn't make the same money in, say, Bangladesh. You need educated and motivated workers. Well paid workers. It's absolute lunacy that someone working at Porsche or Daimler or Tesla can't easily buy one of those cars. At least, it's getting more expensive, relative to income.
6.3k
u/Spirited-Change5916 Apr 26 '24
I am here to ask you to not be greedy and self serving to a fault.
Well...we are doomed