One thing that this ‘over-class’ seems to forget is that we are living in the 21st century – ‘plebeians’ now feel on a par with what was once the aristocracy – there has been an evolution, a change in consciousness that they can’t turn back.

When people like Mitt Romney and G.W. Bush can believe they are ‘superior’ beings, you know that too much money is no guarantee of superiority or nobility – quite the contrary. If the old aristocracy still had a modicum of self-respect and sense of honour, these new ‘would-be aristocrats’ are despicable creatures whose money and power grubbing antics makes one think of ravenous wolves, not of someone to look up to.

‘Let them eat cake’ didn’t work in France at the end of the 18th century and it won’t work now. But what is happening is happening because so many people still need to wake up and smell the rotting roses – to that end, discussions such as these are vital.

And this must happen against the back-drop of a finite world, finite resources, finite space, not to mention the increasingly insistent demand of the environment (climate change, Sixth Extinction, badly poisoned water and earth, etc.)

Looks like crash to me and as usual the first losers will be the global 99%. The erasure of “democracy” by “oligarchy” (rule by the 1%) (but how do they know what to agree to on a detailed level?) will prevent the 99% from [1] realizing what’s happening and why until it’s way too late and [2] from reacting to prevent the worset from happening.

Future generations (human and otherwise) will bear the burden. The 1% will cower in their walled communities (or small islands).

But the won’t arrest them http://www.storyleak.com/british-citizen-hands-himself-in-to-scotland-yard-after-pm-cameron-statements-to-un-general-assembly/

Of course our governments are corrupt; they are part of the same elite and operate on a revolving door, basis with corporate interests. It’s a false dichotomy to consider the two as separate. It’s like a horse shoe debating whether the hammer or anvil is responsible for shaping it. They are to parts of a system which affects certain results.

I concede that government is corrupt, now you say that “Investors are right in their intention to extract as much wealth out of their investments as possible. I don’t blame them.” Now why not? I do. You object to corruption but not greed. Which is the common cause of corruption. Greed is not good, It doesn’t matter how often we repeat the mantra. Life isn’t complicated its real simple.

That kid in nursery who ate all the biscuits or would not share the toys-did not do it because he hoped that the overall provision of biscuits would increase, and thus his consumption would create a trickle down of wealth in biscuit crumbs and surplus GI Joes. He did it because he was a prick and he did not give a shit about everyone else.

Greed is bad it always was and always will be. It is amazing how repeating the obviously stupid often enough can convince people of utter bullshit.

You say…
“Problem is not with capitalists being greedy, but with the State being corrupt.”

No the problem is with both of those realities. Generally, however, both parties have both vices and work in both sectors through a lucrative revolving door arrangement. If you accept that one is corrupt to the advantage of the other then ergo you acknowledge a reciprocal relationship. It’s insane to blame the one and side with the other. It’s like vilifying the mugger who held a knife to your throat whilst applauding the initiative of his partner for rifling your pockets it makes no sense at all.

PS.
taking further this whole concept of Money-Not-As-Store-of-Value, but Money as future Growth, or future Return:

If Y is money and money is nothing but the license to have far more money (as your post about debt being predicated on still more debt brings about), then ask any college undergrad who has taken math,

y = y’ (“y prime”, ie. rate of change of y) the pet undergrad will parrot back to you that this is the fundamental equation for exponential growth, with solution y = e^t.

In this context THINK OF THE CRIME done to the 99% by QE. The 99% is reduced, by fiat, to 0.1% growth rates in their savings accounts, while banks and the 1% continue 5% or higher growth rates.

So the financial press repeatedly, and foolishly asks, “how long will QE last?”….answer: as soon as the 1% are made whole for their notional losses incurred in the last debt-ridden orgy. There IS an exact timing, the timing in the differential of 4% growth to restore/accrue the notional loss (which is never precisely released to the public since the crash of lat 2007).

This is exactly what Thomas Piketty was writing about in his recently released book. There is a class of people who have high growth r>g, merely by virtue of being in the class. This class of people are very proud of their trappings. It dictates who they marry, who they socialize with, where they go to school etc etc etc.

In reality it is just nonsense. the entirety of humanity is slave to this ponzi scheme of never ending growth, and we wonder why the environment and the climate si so messed up.

Cheers.

This is also true of the income stream which “backs” equity.
http://antisophism.blogspot.com/2012/07/the-failure-of-conventional-equity.html

(sorry for the fonts, google messes up anything with mathjax in it.)

The whole financial system is a charade. You could literally GIVE away money to a corporation, but it would NOT satiate ANY NEEDS. The only input signal required to financial entities is a steadily ramping up cash flow. What a pathologic psychopathic behavior engendered by one phrase “shareholder value”.

Hello Golem IV,

Thank you for your response.
Another way of talking about the Global Over Class is talking about the adherents of the New World Order (NWO). There is a lot of misformation on this subject to be found on the internet. However, the best and singlemost comprehensive explanation I have EVER seen about the New World Order comes from one of Edward Griffin’s lectures. His lecture is called “The Quigley Formula” and it is a review of professor Quigley’s book ‘Tragedy and Hope’. Professor Quigley was a Council on Foreign Relations member and historian, as well as mentor to CFR & Trilateral Commission member Bill Clinton. Professor Quigley was one of the ultimate insiders and his book is the conspiratorial view of history as taught by the conspirators themselves. This book was never supposed to see the light of day, but it did. Griffin’s lecture on ‘The Quigley Formula’ absolutely blew my mind when I saw it. In my book this is an absolute MUST SEE VIDEO.
You can see it on: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ynVqPnMQ2sI.

You can see Bill Clinton mention professor Quigley covertly but in a highly symbolic and meaningful setting when he accepts the nomination for president at the Democratic National Convention in 1992:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A76LFGtWhRQ
[41 seconds]

Ron Paul explains the significance and meaning of what happened there at that Convention in this short video (but you really have to see Griffin’s lecture):
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-g1TaYYGv8Q
[1 minute, 47 seconds]

Hello Mason,

I agree with what you say about the 1% versus the 0,01%. I use the 1% because it has some currency but perhaps I shouldn’t. What I really mean and it’s why I use the term is The Global Over Class.

I also strongly agree that we will need people in the 1% and see no reason to turn away any who want to help no matter what their income. As you say we will need a broad church if we want to win.

So thank you for commenting and you have my word that there will always be a place here for intelligent and polite criticism.

I found this to be a absolutely brilliant piece. Thank you for that!

I only disagreed with one thing: the real enemy is not the 1%. The real enemy is the 0,01%. The real enemy is not the wealthy capitalists. The real enemy is the ultra-wealthy really well-connected-revolving-door-CRONY capitalists.

I am neither a Republican nor Democrat, but one thing that always bothered me from the Occupy Wallstreet movement was the slogan about the 99% vs the 1%.

If we are going to win the war against the Oligarchy, we are going to need the people in 1% that is not part of the 0,01%. We are going to need people like Doug Casey from Casey Research for example, who are as anti-establishment as it gets. But you are just lumping people like him in the same category as the 0,01%.

If we are going to win the war against the Oligarchy, we are going to need ‘Occypy Wallstreet’, we are going to need ‘The Teaparty’ AND we are going to need the 1% that is not part of the 0,01%.

To illustrate my point I am going to leave you with three links, all of which are from the Blog ‘Liberty Blitzrkrieg’:

1)
The difference between the 1% and the 0,01% is explained:
http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2014/03/31/where-does-the-real-problem-reside-two-charts-showing-the-0-01-vs-the-1/

2)
Occupy Wallstret and The Tea Party are Upset About the Same Thing…One Picture:
http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2012/10/03/occupy-wall-street-and-the-tea-party-are-upset-about-the-same-thing-one-picture/

3)
Michael Krieger discusses your present piece ‘The Next Crisis – Part Two – A manifesto for the supremacy of the 1%. He just loves your article. The only criticism he has is your use of the 1% instead of the 0,01%
http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2014/09/26/the-status-quo-playbook-beyond-2014-regulation-by-corporations-professional-politicians-and-the-strip-mining-of-sovereign-assets/

I hope you can give my constructive criticism a place, and again: I think your article was just brilliant! Thanks again.

http://fictionadvocate.com/2014/09/22/when-google-met-wikileaks-by-julian-assange/