Every story, even ours, needs a bad guy. Best villains don't think they are villains. They just do what they must/should/want (in that order, depending on their intensity), because they can.
One question : what would be, solely according to you, the best policies to get "us" out of this mess ? Tax wealth ? Nuke inheritance ? Something else ?
I don't think it's a mess: it's all going according to plan and maybe 100-300 families worldwide are very happy - the capital-holders.
I'm from the Global South, and most people here are from the North, so to answer your question I'll have to be a little bit vague: I'm a communist [0].
In small tribes you don't need as much organization, but the larger the scale the more organization you need. Weak and powerless people are usually that way, because it is natural to them. It is nonsense to say that only a tiny number of people have any influence over the world. Some people have more influence than others, yes, but that exists even in tribes.
Every country that ever aspired to communism had people who were at the top and people who were at the bottom, far more so than free market countries.
How many of the famous names you can think of that changed the modern world started off from old money? A lot of these things come from new money private investors or government incentives and grants, or they just bootstrapped themselves and grew organically.
It might be fair to say that we should do more to preserve inexpensive rural life as a viable alternative to many people, because a lot of people born in cities today may more realistically be better suited to the pace and burden of rural life.
Alternatively, we should renormalize people living together in larger numbers the way they did in the 1800s and early 1900s (though not to the same extreme). Individualism is expensive, but many people preserve a more individualistic lifestyle even if their personal finances don't easily support it and then they blame everything outside of their life rather than their own choices.
reply