3 ms·

Of course not; that is never the prescription. Because if you keep the institutions in place, gross inequality would simply reemerge. Like if you toppled the k

Of course not; that is never the prescription. Because if you keep the institutions in place, gross inequality would simply reemerge. Like if you toppled the kings while keeping a feudal system, or freed all the slaves while keeping slavery intact. You have to alter the system to one which doesn't doesn't have these outcomes. Obviously, the powerful elites don't like this, as they correctly perceive this as "revolution": a fundamental change to the institutions. (An egalitarian society by definition means they won't have massively greater power than others.) So they will predictably respond with violence. (Note that the police and military effectively work for them.)

swombat 14y ago
Obviously, the powerful elites don't like this I don't think so. I know a number of wealthy people, and they are very open about how to make money, how to maintain wealth, and so on. Many of them have even decided that the best way to spend their time now that they're wealthy is to teach others how to get there too. Of course, teaching 7 billion people how to behave in economically sensible ways is a pretty arduous, long-term task, so it'll take a while for the effect of this to be visible... but I don't think the "elites" are in the way of lifting everyone else up - so long as the method isn't principally to pull them down. Equalisation by bringing everyone up to the highest possible level is a worthwhile goal. Equalisation by bringing every down to the lowest possible level is not.