And it is the job of the oligarchs to use their resources (e.g. think tanks, regulatory capture, political parties, media empires, etc) to convince the rest that it's "right vs left".
Interestingly, the original definition of “left” and “right” came from the French Revolution where in the National Assembly the aristocracy sat on the right and everyone else sat on the left. That matches pretty closely to the oligarchy vs everyone else.
See also "Moneyland" <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/sep/07/moneyland-oliver-bullough-review" rel="nofollow">https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/sep/07/moneyland-oliv...</a><p>Its about the ways in which the top 0.01% hide their money in networks of shell companies, tax havens etc, and the difficulty of actually taxing them.
The lexicon is one dimensional, but the reality is multidimensional.<p>On social issues, there is a fairly clear right vs left.<p>On economic issues, it really is oligarchy vs ordinary people.<p>On war, foreign policy, the MIC is linked up with big money, and ordinary people vary, but anti war talk is often marginalized.<p>Go down the list, and it should become fairly clear big money does have conflict of interest issues, and politics reflects that reality.<p>Right now, economics is a high priority. Flat out, too many Americans (and this is true in other places too) are not getting what they need, and some modest wants fulfilled from their labor.<p>That is forcing a class discussion as a priority over the usual politics.<p>Examples:<p>Even the bigots need Medicare for All (or sane health care policy generally) Speaks to common class issues. Populism.<p>Given a choice between tolerating trans people, gays marrying, and say, feeding kids in a reasonable home and the promise of gainful employment, which has priority? Your socioeconomic status impacts this greatly. Speaks right to divide on left, as well as common class issues.<p>The current shift toward class issues puts social progress at risk as new and powerful wedges form at the boundaries of all this stuff.<p>Lefties struggle with a non trivial divide, and it is drawn right along big money lines. And the anti big money people have that as a priority. Many will not be swayed by threats or risks related to social regression.<p>I invite someone more aligned with the right to offer their take on all this. Would be high value.<p>If you ask me, all these observations, and that is all they are, add up to a basic shift in the body politic. And it has happened.<p>No undo. It will all just have to play out, until we reach a new more consistent state.
There have been numerous articles and columns written about the dangers of rising populism in Europe, yet here is a respectable voice advocating populism as the solution for US.<p>So which is it, the solution or a danger?
> That means creating a multi-racial, multi-ethnic coalition of working-class, poor and middle-class Americans who will fight for democracy and oppose oligarchy.<p><i>Arise, ye workers from your slumber,</i><p><i>Arise, ye prisoners of want.</i><p><i>For reason in revolt now thunders,</i><p><i>and at last ends the age of cant!</i><p>There might not be right vs left, but the article definitely hits some familiar notes
“It is accepted as democratic when public offices are allocated by lot; and as oligarchic when they are filled by election.” Aristotle<p>The solution is <a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition" rel="nofollow">https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition</a>
The central question of this article:<p>> So why do we continue to hear and use the same old “right” and “left” labels?<p>> I suspect it’s because the emerging oligarchy feels safer if Americans are split along the old political battle lines. That way, Americans won’t notice they’re being shafted.<p>Wouldn't this imply the oligarchs control the media? Or at least the public discourse? But that's not the impression I get from the media. CNN, MSNBC, and other networks make it perfectly clear they are anti-Trump, in fact most of the media seems to be in agreement with that. Same with the most popular reddit channels, popular outlets like Guardian, Vox, Huffington Post, and Twitter. I mean almost everybody seems to agree that Trump is bad. YouTube and Fox seem to be the exception.<p>I wrestle with understanding why most media are anti-Trump and anti-oligarchy, and the oligarchs are still able to control those media's use of 'left' and 'right'. How does this work?
Rich vs poor is even less meaningful divide than right vs left. For instance i am not rich but my goals are much better aligned with goals of rich people like Elon Musk and Aubrey de Grey, than with any of poor people.<p>The solution is not to take money from the rich, but to make the government more transparent and more inclusive. Now we only can vote for unknown bundles of policies in the form of people, and rich people can pay to change the bundle after it is voted in. The solution to that is to use e-voting to be able to change your vote for separate issues when you do not agree with the vote of your representative.