An excess of billionaires is destabilising politics - just as academics predicted

[Nevilledog]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/31/elon-musk-an-excess-of-billionaires-is-destabilising-politics-just-as-academics-predicted

No paywall link
https://archive.li/6bBCs

The concept of “elite overproduction” was developed by social scientist Peter Turchin around the turn of this century to describe something specific: too many rich people for not enough rich-person jobs. It’s a byproduct of inequality: a ton of poor people, sure, but also a superfluity of the wealthy, without enough positions to house them in the influence and status to which they think themselves entitled. In a modern context, that would mean senior positions in the government and civil service, along with the top tier of finance and law, but Turchin tested the hypothesis from ancient Rome to 19th-century Britain. The names and nature of the contested jobs and titles changed; the pattern remained. Turchin predicted in 2010 that by the 2020s it would be destabilising US politics.

In the UK in recent years the phrase has been repurposed in the wildest ways – to mean an excess of people at university creates unwanted activism (my précis); or, in the Economist (paraphrasing again), landslides create too many mediocre backbench MPs, who can’t hope for preferment so make trouble instead. And while the second proposition might be true, the first is basic anti-intellectualism. Turchin didn’t specify exactly how much wealth puts you in a situation with an overproduced elite, but he didn’t mean debt-laden students; he didn’t mean MPs; he meant, for brevity, billionaires or the top 1%. When a lot of your media are billionaire-owned, those media sources become endlessly inventive in taking the heat off billionaires, nipping criticism in the bud by pilfering its vocabulary and throwing it back at everyone.

But put a pin in that for a second, because elite overproduction in its true sense is hitting global politics square in the jaw. Elon Musk has inserted himself into the US election by means long term and short, above board and below it. His impact on X (formerly Twitter) since he bought it was mired for a while in comical cackhandedness, but over the past few months the real purpose has crystallised. Paid-for verification removed any faith in trusted sources that couldn’t be bought; Republican accounts flourish, Democratic ones languish. Musk himself has amplified lies and conspiracy theories. He has directly given $75m to his America PAC (political action committee), which has an X account and a yellow tick (whatever the hell that means) – it peddles xenophobic bilge. Musk opened a $1m Philadelphia voter giveaway that may be illegal earlier in the month.

Musk also spoke at the Madison Square Garden rally, but left the “ironic” fash posting (derogatory language about places and races) to others. He made one promise: “We’re going to get the government off your back.” He fleshed out what small government meant, in a telephone town hall (like a radio phone in, except the radio phones you, the constituents) over the weekend: ordinary Americans would face “temporary hardship” as welfare programmes are slashed in order to restructure the economy, but they should embrace the pain, as “it will ensure long-term prosperity”.

*snip*

[cilla4progress]

1. Concentration of wealth...

inevitable in under-regulated capitalist states; deadly to the rest of us non-billionaires or wealthy assholes.

[Fullduplexxx]

2. Obscene wealth is a national security threat

[DFW]

3. I'll start taking Musk seriously when he personally starts "embracing the pain."

While I don’t subscribe to much of the rhetoric that sounds a lot like the rhetoric here (Germany) 90 years ago, with all its Enteignung mania (one reason the modern German constitution forbids double taxation and thus struck down a wealth tax proposal), telling a society’s worst-off to embrace their pain is condescending, insulting and downright cruel. I’m not advocating a National Socialist approach to “tax the rich,” i.e. kill the ones you don’t like and take everything. Even if one were to confiscate every cent Musk has and distribute it equally to every American citizen, we’d all get a one-off bonus of about $700. Big deal.

However, if Musk were required to give up all access to his fortune for two years, and be made to embrace the pain the homeless feel for that time, I’m pretty sure he’d be singing a different tune by the end of his “sabbatical” in the real world.