[lbo-talk] Obama got Osama

123hop at comcast.net 123hop at comcast.net
Mon May 2 12:15:04 PDT 2011


Obviously, money is a means to an end, but the end could be that you have the biggest dick around (cash-wise), and for most rich people that's all it means.

There are those rich that do something useful, Tolstoy for example. But they're few and far between.

Could we be "richer" outside the net of capitalist social relations? Yes. But it would not be a money wealth; it would be the liberation from alienation and the soul-sickenss that comes from knowing that every bit of your labor is used to build or sustain an evil system.

Joanna

----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Bennett" <bennett.mab at gmail.com>

I wonder if most people would prefer to be rich? Speaking solely from my experience, I suggest that most people would prefer to do what they would like to do, to that which they enjoy, and makes them feel satisfied and productive. Wealth is the easiest road to this goal, so yes, most people may prefer to be wealthy; but not simply for having the cash, but for having the options that the cash provides. As you noted earlier in the thread, the means are available to provide many, if not most, people with these options, but because of current social and political arrangements these options remain the province of tycoons and saints.

On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Wojtek S <wsoko52 at gmail.com> wrote:


>
>
> PS. I think that most people (save a few die hard idealistic
> intellectuals) would prefer to be rich and live amongst selfish
> bastards than to be poor and live amongst the virtuous.
>
> Wojtek
>
>
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list