If we consider the smiling Devil-may-care Guy Fawkes mask culturally re-appropriated by anonymous as the theatrical comedy mask, then a proposed synonymous would stay faceless behind the tragedy mask. “I am not anonymous legion, I am synonymous for you.”
The prestigious Princeton University has released results of a study making the wondrously insulting claim that bad decisions made by those impoverished amplify their own predicaments and financial woes. And that this is due apparently to a natural predilection for diminished brain capacity.
The idea of being poor because of incompetence is an old stereotype, with obvious designs. It’s so systemic many play into it without ever realizing they align with cultists, denigrating and condemning non-believers and those victimized/terrorized by the grandiose Capitalistic faith as lesser-than. I am realistically better-read than Trump’s kids combined and here I walk, a dropout in every connotation. Frankly, poor people can stretch their dollars much farther than do wealthy people, so I’d argue that the given understanding of economics is actually reversed. Not being materialistic consumers means that the have-nots can easily prove smart enough to not fall for every jingoistic marketing ploy, for starters. With no pot to piss in I personally have managed to avoid debt all my life, unlike many Princeton grads or the greater portion of the world’s money-worshiping population.
In the all-seeing eyes of the domestic law enforcement here in Uncle Sam’s god-fearing melting pot, debt is synonymous for poverty. One can be locked up merely for being homeless just as easily as one owing monies can be sent off to debtor’s prisons. Yet the government, further into debt than any nation to the extent of disappearing over a quarter of the world’s wealth, self-perpetuates this myth of having the absolute strongest economy, setting all standards and pridefully maintaining the brand of first world nation. For a government of the people not to view its own citizenry by the same standards is bluntly feverish insanity. Poverty is actively criminalized, as a rebranding for this perpetual slave caste, and there’s no real coming back for a culture that crosses that threshold.
Let’s re-imagine Atlas Shrugged so that the billionaires are vanishing because John Galt is actually a serial killer. I indulge the theory that there exists infinite realities varying and evolving from one another, and that every single nocturnal misadventure of a dream we might experience is a randomized POV from one of those worlds. The real Jungian Collective Unconscious is a time-share. Some 20′ celery stalk is dreaming your afternoon, soon to awaken and stiffen in its watery world wondering what the heck that one was all about. We’ve ready access to infinite perspectives, so the ones we are compelled to abide by are by no means a thing to settle down with. Yet virtually everyone does, nonetheless.
Perhaps it has become especially easier to demonize the poor today, because too few have taken the liberty of loosening their own chains enough to recall how to use pitchforks and torches anymore. Capitalism makes people angry and miserable. Personae demeaned into commodity for whatever lucrative horseshit makes people angry and miserable. Confining ourselves through voodoo doll proxy avatars into a reversed binding spell makes people angry and miserable. If most products and services were legitimately needed then why do they require marketing, advertising and promotions to sell to the public? We are all at our best when we put the needs of others first, not their desires. Thus, mistaking the whims of your chosen icon, be they political, religious or corporate, for your own is pussy-whipped slavery. Brand loyalty to a monied class is indistinguishable from how religion amounts to daddy complexes. But the hand you reach for is too busy masturbating to notice you at all.
Though passive-aggressively accepted as the modern incarnation of the slave’s chained collar, there is no such thing as a good pill. But a more difficult pill to swallow is that there is no such thing as a good Capitalism, in the sense that there simply is no good form of oppression. Prefixing or suffixing ‘Capitalism’ with a hyphen is only putting lipstick on a dog. As such, Universal Basic Income is putting band-aids on bullet wounds, leaving the shooter free to raise his caliber. Raised minimum wage only meets with raised costs, as history tirelessly proves again and again. It’s focusing on the wrong end of the spectrum entirely. But worse, it perpetuates the myth of a good Capitalism. Raising or even ensuring a minimum wage is pointless when there’s to be no cap on maximum wages, forcing the trickle back down to its origins. The side of the spectrum creating the issue remains empowered and will continue to do nothing less. Which is a point usually missed by Libertarianism, the prepubescent form of Feudalism. Instead of demonizing undocumented workers, where is the argument against those numerous employers overeager to avoid paying taxes, insurance or livable wages for those who butter their bread? In neither conversation is there ever much talk proposing actions to be taken against the “job creators” exploiting workers. It’s prestidigitation. If the causes could be depowered then the effects would disappear. But everybody wants that money.
Real employee activism would be to stop making money for said employer altogether, permanently. Actual, visceral leftism is sacrifice. Going without to ensure those with legitimate needs get theirs first, or to ensure those cock-blocking said needs get theirs up the rightful end. Raised minimums is essentially thanking a rapist for deciding not to cum inside you, whereas lowering maximums would be castrating the rapist. Even at one million per year, results would be startlingly positive for all but the entitled, old money few. The precise manner of folks who, unless using and abusing others, can only get money when inherited by previous generations who used and abused others.
People should ask themselves why those voices pushing most loudly for UBI or raising minimal wages are never big on applying as much or more efforts toward pushing the idea of capping the other end. Or just abolishing financial capital altogether. Those opposed obviously want the means to wield it over others, whether they can admit it or not. And where exactly would funding for UBI come from? Oh well we’d need new tax revenue streams to support it, along with slashing traditional welfare programs and allotting additional corporate subsidies. You may get a gold tooth but the booted heel is still holding your mouth to the curb. The most popular ideal is that such funds would be supplied through the generosity of the very class which accumulated its means through the exploitation of anyone and everyone else.
The people with money do not give it away now, so why would that change once automation renders even more of the general public irrelevant? If the billionaires (and apparently trillionaires now as well) won’t give the masses a free ride presently, then why in the holiest of royal fucks presume they will be more inclined when robots replace the manual labor gigs, as we are fear-mongered over and over ad nauseum? Why pay for us to buy their products when they could just cut the middlemen and keep the scratch from the get-go? Would they really be legally compelled to play it straight by DC, where each and every single bacteria coming together like voltron to form Uncle Sam has a public policy and a private policy, bouncing forth and back upon the giant tits of Lady Liberty in broad fucking daylight? That degree of naivete positively validates the study mentioned at the top of this article. Cults of personality only benefit the centerpieces. In this cult, the followers are every blessed bit as unstable as their daddy figures themselves. They are so crazy they cannot recognize the simple math of finite wealth equating to finite profits.
Bleed us dry and we will line up to drink their blood, because why eat shit-cakes when we can just eat the rich? When we are not permitted to bring the 99% up, then we have no option but to bring the 1% down. And so what if it might be untenable for this culture? That only means our culture absolutely must change, because if we’re permitting a system that values profit over life itself, then no adult even remotely concerned with ethics or morality should want anything to do with it. No matter the branding or hyphens or yoga pants obfuscating the fucking obvious.