Government as a Conspiracy of the Rich - Utopia

April 7th, 2008 by Kavan Wolfe

In Utopia, Thomas More argues that governments are a conspiracy of the rich to control the poor:

“Therefore I must say that, as I hope for mercy, I can have no other notion of all the other governments that I see or know, than that they are a conspiracy of the rich, who, on pretence of managing the public, only pursue their private ends, and devise all the ways and arts they can find out; first, that they may, without danger, preserve all that they have so ill-acquired, and then, that they may engage the poor to toil and labour for them at as low rates as possible, and oppress them as much as they please; and if they can but prevail to get these contrivances established by the show of public authority, which is considered as the representative of the whole people, then they are accounted laws…”

Although some argue that Utopia is a satire, I’m not concerned with whether More was serious; I’m concerned with whether he was right. Suppose that governments were a conspiracy of the rich. What would we expect to find?

1. Most government leaders would be rich

The average net worth of President George W. Bush’s cabinet falls between $9.3 and $27.3 million. In, The Audacity of Hope, Barrak Obama points out that most senators are already rich before they go into office.

2. Poor people’s crimes will carry greater punishments than rich people’s crimes

The punishment for theft over $400 is up to a year in prison in the US and in some states repeat offenses can get life imprisonment. In Canada, theft over $5000 gets you up to 10 years. In comparison, the criminal penalties for insider trading, which may involve stealing millions, is a fine of between $10 000 and $100 000. Why is it that if you steal $10 000 000 through insider trading, you have to pay a fine, but if you steal three cars, you can get life in prison?

3. Government would ignore the will of the poor

In response to allegations that most Americans are against the war, Dick Cheney said, “So?” I rest my case.

4. The rich would pay less taxes

It’s pretty bad when Warren Buffett (as in the billionaire) pays a lower tax rate than his secretary, there’s something really wrong.

5. Government will bailout the rich but not the poor.

As pointed out by Stephen Colbert, when rich people lost big money on BearStearns going bankrupt, the Fed stepped in to bail them out. When poor people lost their houses in the recent mortgage disaster, did anyone bail them out? No.

Conclusion

Assuming that government is a conspiracy of the rich allows us to make startling accurate predictions. However, Ptolemy’s model of the solar system can make the same claim, despite being totally ass backwards. None of this is conclusive, but it is thought provoking.

8 Responses to “Government as a Conspiracy of the Rich - Utopia”

  1. Tilon Says:

    “None of this is conclusive, but it is thought provoking.”

    It’s more conclusive the more you delve into the rabbit hole.

    Honestly, it’s quite simple, man. Just think about all the things they do that don’t make any sense looking at it from a ‘classical’ point of view, and look at it from the perspective of people who recognize that the Public is not part of the discourse, they are merely to be told what to do.

    Everything falls into place.

  2. john Says:

    Of course Thomas Moore used satire. Imagine him telling the king that he was a leech on the people…

    In using the form of satire Moore spoke the truth. As does Stephen Colbert. Colbert gets a chuckle out of it, but that doesn’t make it any less the truth.

    George Carlin applies ascerbic wit when he performs, but he’s telling the truth.

    The rich really do not care about the poor. They never have. They never will [notable exceptions notwithstanding].

    The rich count on the apathy of the masses to impose their will on the people. Finger prints and iris scans on entering the country, DNA taken an stored without parental consent, waging wars to accommodate narrow interests. Nobody is able to change it. George Bush and Dick Cheney will leave office without having been so much as censored. Bill Clinton was impeached for a trivial offense. But he came from a poor background. He was never really ‘one of us’.

    Thomas Moore shows us that these concepts were recognized and understood centuries ago and that nothing has changed. That is why we are doomed as a species, there are too many hands pulling us down, not enough lifting us up.

  3. Adam Pieniazek Says:

    Good points. It certainly is apathy of the masses, most people I know are not part of the rich-elite but understand the issues you raise, they just feel it’s always been like that and always will. Nothing would ever get accomplished if the apathetic had a say.

    Bush’s tyrannical power rampage should have been the straw that broke the camel’s back but instead many of these poor and middle class people are rallying behind Barack Obama, who is basically a convenient anti-Bush paraded around to seem like there’s hope in this government. There is not. Our elections are not free of fraud and for the people to have power in this country, we have to start from scratch.

  4. Roach Says:

    A revolution does not need to be fought in the streets placing blood on the innocent. The revolution must be fought and won only in one’s own mind. Think - it’s not illegal yet.

  5. Roach Says:

    The rich can never steal the freedom in my mind. Basically, think about it this way, whatever they want you to do: spend, consume, procreate. Do exactly the opposite.

  6. H Says:

    It’s time for Americans to take their country back. March on Washington by the millions. Viva la revolution!

    Until this happens, the US will continue to get worse.

  7. Kavan Wolfe Says:

    Thanks for all the good comments.

    @Tilon, the danger here is attracting the tin foil hat club.I’m concerned that the structure and operations of government have been continuously and disproportionately, but not systematically, influenced by the rich over centuries. This is very different from the idea that a group of wealthy mystery men are quietly pulling the strings behind all world leaders, which is a crock of shit

    @John, the suggestion about More using satire is more subtle. It came strange that a man who zealously prosecuted heretics would simultaneously argue for religious tolerance. I don’t believe that nobody is able to change the current stance of government, but I do believe it will take time. As education improves (perhaps if education improves) it becomes more difficult to hoodwink the public.

    @Adam Pieniazek, “We have to start from scratch” is a loaded statement. it’s not clear whether this is even possible, let alone whether it is a good idea.

    @Roach, if you brainwash people, you have stolen the freedom of their minds. Religious organizations are very good at this. I don’t see how not having children is going to help…

    @H, I severely doubt that marching on Washington would accomplish anything.

  8. H Says:

    “I severely doubt that marching on Washington would accomplish anything.”

    Do it long enough and with enough people it will disrupt operations and piss them off so much that they will give in. I don’t think they are going to start arresting or shooting millions of people.

Leave a Reply