Class Warfare:The divide and conquer strategy

Playing off my last post about Ferguson, there was something I implied but didn’t directly state. That is the fact that the powers the be are running a divide and conquer strategy on us, and plays right into everything unless you take a longer view.

For example, I illustrated the whole black vs white thing, and people will swear up and down how big of a deal this is, that the blacks are out of control, or that the whites are suppressing us blacks etc. The reality is, you could find evidence for both, the larger reality is, both are proles in the larger game. When you have the black and white pawn killing each other the kings can stay safe in the back.

Think about that metaphor a bit more, because that is exactly what is occurring here. The primary point I want to touch on today is the class warfare divide, this is a perfect example of misdirection, as it again falls on the whole ‘rich vs poor’ or ‘job creators vs leech’ arguments.

First, the misdirection begins as always with the setup, it is framed as leeches trying to steal money from the job creators, through tax schemes, goes the typical argument. Some sort of ‘nazi socialism’ (yes I realize). The typical argument goes something along the lines of ‘taxing the job creators’ – despite the evidence lower taxes does not spur more hiring. Anyway, for definitive proof, check this: where Kansas removed all taxes on business, some sort of Galt/Rand paradise, and predictably its been a complete failure as massive budget shortfalls and no new jobs.

Whatever. Its easy to attack republican economics, but that isn’t the point, nor is the FALSE class conflict argument valid. Now, I need to be completely clear here, there is a massive, massive class conflict occurring, but it is not the ‘small business job creators’ the repubs lionize, as the upper tier here. I got perhaps some novel news, the person who works in an office, some lawyer or whatever making 100k a year is NOT the elite upper class, he is part of the same prole group we all are.

See, this is the important thing to realize, is that how often is the battle pitched between the poor female school teacher making 35k a year, and that evil lawyer making 120k, are their salaries probably fucked up in terms of society value? Sure, but essentially at BEST what this is is a pawn fighting perhaps a knight, to extend the chess metaphor, someone invested in the system, but still no clue as to what is really going on.

How come the average person doesn’t know any major CEO, or that only a FEW media companies literally control nearly everything we see? Or that 10 corporations control nearly the entire food supply? Who the fuck is that ‘king’? He has far more power than some shitty lawyer or small business owner who is the hero of the republican tale. Or how about the fact no one talks about globalism, and its complete destruction of the US economic system?


That is the TRUE class conflict, not the poor black guy and the mid-upper class middle manager. But this is the game that is kept from us, the ultra elite have nearly complete control on us already, and instead of a unified front against them, we are busy with blacks and income inequalities that pale to the multi-millions these make every day.

6 corporations control media


25 thoughts on “Class Warfare:The divide and conquer strategy

  1. I went through this too in “There’s No Privilege, Only Class”. It’s amazing so many people haven’t considered that the reason it’s easy to hate rich white men is that rich white men are an intangible thing you can scapegoat, whereas a specific rich white man is a tangible thing that’s invisible to them.

    It’s also noteworthy, as I pointed out in that essay, that almost every “oppressed” group is oppressed not due to ethnicity, political allegiance, or gender, but due to the status-quo being maintained by people who resemble the supposedly “privileged” groups and due to a cultural environment that follows the same expansion pattern used since Victorian England. If blacks were disproportionately poorer at the start of the Victorian Empire due to actual oppression, then they will remain as poor today. Why? Not because they’re black. Because none of their daddies or mommies have their teeth in a big corporation. Yet people deny that we live in a plutocracy.

  2. Interesting graphics. There’s another one here which includes the media and banking industries:

    The way that corporations rule the world today is reminiscent of the way that Empires used to dominate the world. At one time there were many small kingdoms then over time a small number of those kingdoms conquered the others and then we ended up with a small number of large Empires (like the Austro-Hungarian Empire which gained much land via marriage and miltary conquest). It’s the same with corporations: a small number end up ruling them all. I suppose the next logical question though is when will they fall? After all the Empires of old fell, so why not the Corporations of today?

      • >After all the Empires of old fell, so why not the Corporations of today?

        Technological advances have made it a lot easier to keep the population content. Also the current empires are covert unlike the old ones. Nations still exist but it’s almost an illiusion as their governments have no power and are mostly puppets. Try going against what the US/EU want and see what happens. Just try to imagine what would happen to a country if it would suddenly decide to revoke women’s right to vote. Some people are saying there are signs of the tides changing but I can’t really tell if it is true. Things may need to get really ridiculous before men decide to act.

        • Yes, this is a good summary of a lot of major reasons the new ‘kings’ haven’t fallen, I would add distance to it as well, and old king you could see his castle, now…well who knows where the hell the ceos live.

      • TAnon wrote
        Also the current empires are covert unlike the old ones.

        Yeah that’s true. The peasants in the old Empires could actually see their King/Emperor and pay them homage be it in the Roman colliseum, outside Buckingham Palace, the Red Square or whereever. Not to mention the aggression/warfare of course.

        You might be able to simplify it somehow and say that there are more degrees of distance between the rulers and the ruled than there used to be (physical distance, wealth distance, conceptual distance, emotional distance etc).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s