-
On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:14 AM, albert lundquist <[email protected]> wrote: > Privilege, Pathology and Power > > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/paulkrugman/index.html> > > Paul Krugman <http://www.nytimes.com/column/paul-krugman> JAN. 1, 2016 > 1864 COMMENTS > > > > Wealth can be bad for your soul. That’s not just a hoary piece of folk > wisdom; it’s a conclusion from serious social science > <http://healthland.time.com/2013/08/20/wealthy-selfies-how-being-rich-increases-narcissism/>, > confirmed by statistical analysis and experiment. The affluent are, on > average, less likely to exhibit empathy, less likely to respect norms and > even laws, more likely to cheat, than those occupying lower rungs on the > economic ladder. > > And it’s obvious, even if we don’t have statistical confirmation, that > extreme wealth can do extreme spiritual damage. Take someone whose > personality might have been merely disagreeable under normal circumstances, > and give him the kind of wealth that lets him surround himself with > sycophants and usually get whatever he wants. It’s not hard to see how he > could become almost pathologically self-regarding and unconcerned with > others.Wealth can be bad for your soul. That’s not just a hoary piece of > folk wisdom; it’s a statistical analysis and experiment. The affluent are, > on average, less likely to exhibit empathy, less likely to respect norms > and even laws, more likely to cheat, than those occupying lower rungs on > the economic ladder. > > So what happens to a nation that gives ever-growing political power to the > superrich? > > > Modern America is a society in which a growing share of income and wealth > is concentrated in the hands of a small number of people, and these people > have huge political influence — in the early stages of the 2016 > presidential campaign, around half the contributions > <http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/11/us/politics/2016-presidential-election-super-pac-donors.html> > came > from fewer than 200 wealthy families. The usual concern about this march > toward oligarchy is that the interests and policy preferences of the very > rich are quite different from those of the population at large, and that is > surely the biggest problem. > > But it’s also true that those empowered by money-driven politics include a > disproportionate number of spoiled egomaniacs. Which brings me to the > current election cycle. > > The most obvious illustration of the point I’ve been making is the man now > leading the Republican field. Donald Trump would probably have been a > blowhard and a bully whatever his social station. But his billions have > insulated him from the external checks that limit most people’s ability to > act out their narcissistic tendencies; nobody has ever been in a position > to tell him, “You’re fired!” And the result is the face you keep seeing on > your TV. > > But Mr. Trump isn’t the only awesomely self-centered billionaire playing > an outsized role in the 2016 campaign. > > There have been some interesting news reports lately about Sheldon > Adelson, the Las Vegas gambling magnate. Mr. Adelson has been involved in > some fairly complex court proceedings, which revolve around claims of > misconduct in his operations in Macau, including links to organized crime > and prostitution. Given his business, this may not be all that surprising. > What was surprising was his behavior in court > <http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/judge-adelson-lawsuit-subject-unusual-scrutiny-amid-review-journal-sale>, > where he refused to answer routine questions and argued with the judge, > Elizabeth Gonzales. That, as she rightly pointed out, isn’t something > witnesses get to do. > > Then Mr. Adelson bought Nevada’s largest newspaper. As the sale was being > finalized, reporters at the paper were told to drop everything and start > monitoring all activity of three judges, including Ms. Gonzales. And while > the paper never published any results from that investigation, an attack on > Judge Gonzales, with what looks like a fictitious byline, did appear in a > small Connecticut newspaper owned by one of Mr. Adelson’s associates. > > O.K., but why do we care? Because Mr. Adelson’s political spending has > made him a huge player in Republican politics — so much so that reporters > routinely talk about the “Adelson primary > <https://www.yahoo.com/politics/millions-at-stake-the-adelson-primary-is-neck-125553624.html>,” > in which candidates trek to Las Vegas to pay obeisance. > > > > <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/01/opinion/privilege-pathology-and-power.html#story-continues-7>Are > there other cases? Yes indeed, even if the egomania doesn’t rise to Adelson > levels. I find myself thinking, for example, of the hedge-fund billionaire > Paul Singer, another big power in the G.O.P., who published an investor’s > letter declaring that inflation was running rampant > <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/11/06/heres-the-latest-dumb-argument-from-a-billionaire-that-will-hurt-the-economy/> > — > he could tell from the prices of Hamptons real estate and high-end art. > Economists got some laughs out of the incident, but think of the > self-absorption required to write something like that without realizing how > it would sound to non-billionaires. > 1864COMMENTS > > Or think of the various billionaires > <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/20/opinion/krugman-pathos-of-the-plutocrat.html> > who, > a few years ago, were declaring with straight faces, and no sign of > self-awareness, that President Obama was holding back the economy by > suggesting that some business people had misbehaved. You see, he was > hurting their feelings. > > Just to be clear, the biggest reason to oppose the power of money in > politics is the way it lets the wealthy rig the system and distort policy > priorities. And the biggest reason billionaires hate Mr. Obama is what he > did to their taxes > <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/31/upshot/thanks-obama-highest-earners-tax-rates-rose-sharply-in-2013.html>, > not their feelings. The fact that some of those buying influence are also > horrible people is secondary. > > But it’s not trivial. Oligarchy, rule by the few, also tends to become > rule by the monstrously self-centered. Narcisstocracy? Jerkigarchy? Anyway, > it’s an ugly spectacle, and it’s probably going to get even uglier over the > course of the year ahead. > > >
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list Blog - http://www.blog.p2pfoundation.net Wiki - http://www.p2pfoundation.net Show some love and help us maintain and update our knowledge commons by making a donation. Thank you for your support. https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/donation https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
