4 ms·
The issue with the name 'global elites' is that you can put anyone behind it. IPCC scientists, WHO doctors? Elites. Hollywood personalities? Global elites. SV
by orwin 4y ago
The issue with the name 'global elites' is that you can put anyone behind it.
IPCC scientists, WHO doctors? Elites. Hollywood personalities? Global elites. SV devs? Elites too, no?
I think the Marxist 'bourgeoisie' or a more specific 'big capital owners' (which exclude small shareholders) is more narrow, and still too large to be true.
- jack_pp 4y agoScientists, doctors, SV devs are all just employees or pawns, just because they make more money or have more status than the average person doesn't really qualify them to be "elites". I think when people say global elites they mean the ones that have the ones you said in their thrall and move them toward their agendas. The problem is the pawns are too blinded by having that big house and expensive car or just stroking their own ego by having more studies published which makes them easy to control and thus do work which fucks everyone else over
- thelittleone 4y agoAgree with your definition of elites.
- thelittleone 4y agoGlobal elites can surely be better defined but I think its more about power, influence and impunity. Capital / assets / wealth are just by products of that power.
- orwin 4y agoIn my opinion, wealth itself is power, influence and impunity. That you can leverage those to get more wealthy is incidental.
- thelittleone 4y agoChicken and egg scenario. There are quite a few example of leaders of third world countries becoming billionaires and at least one well known example of a billionaire becoming a world leader.