Consequences of the economic crisis in figures in 2011

[Philippe Schutt]

but of course always the theory of the super rich who roll everyone's flour, and who condition people to make them greedy.

sorry i refuse to follow you in this worn-out scheme

[Ahmed]

This simplistic scheme is not the one I propose.

Without developing, there is already a good reason for this: the Manichaeism which appends the "bad" rich to the "good" poor essentializes * two social categories distorts the debate from the start.

We are then led to perceive social reality as divided into victims and victors; or the system carries the weight of full responsibility ...
So many false leads, since everyone (in a very variable proportion) is both responsible and victim of a system that only becomes autonomous due to its abstraction.

*ei that the rich or the poor each become a particular "species", while these more or less shifting social categories result solely from the balance of power present within a society, which themselves determine the rules of the game, perpetuating winners or losers (based on standard value judgments, which is a mistake).

[Philippe Schutt]

wow

[sen-no-sen]

This simplistic scheme is not the one I propose.

Without developing, there is already a good reason for this: the Manichaeism which appends the "bad" rich to the "good" poor essentializes * two social categories distorts the debate from the start.

You are stating part of the far left propaganda ...
It is actually so much easier to get out of the equation, in other words: it is always the fault of others!
Recently I was chatting with someone who told me that the situation in Notre Dame des Landes was unacceptable, that we were in a dictatorship etc ... for 5min later tell me that she had spent a great vacation in Bali!
Schizophrenia in speech seems to me to be the main obstacle to managing the problems of our society.

[Ahmed]

Philippe, I guess you wanted to write: "Wow!" ...

Sen-no-sen, indeed, a good part of the traditional left argumentation is undermined by a fundamental ambiguity; being situated on a moral level, it condemns the power that fortune confers on some, in order to better approve a wealth which would be equitably distributed: as I have already written, "popular capitalism", a contradiction in terms which does not seem be a problem for many ...

Economic liberalism postulates that the "creation" of wealth takes place ex nihilo thanks to agents possessing particular talents, that this wealth will gradually extend to the whole society from the initial "models" and because of its own dynamics.
From the moment when the confrontational aspect of this creation is updated, but the purpose not contested by the left, it is difficult to hold this critical position extremely favorable to the STM ...

This therefore reads as a struggle between categories for the distribution of value and not as an opposition to value: antagonism of sects within the same religion.