Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking. Login or Take a Tour!
From what I can tell, the text doesn't seem to profess any of the specific views you have derived from it. So while I certainly don't disagree with what you're saying, I still don't see how this letter supports anything other than a simplistic viewpoint on a complex topic. I think that you are correct in saying that the letter aims to force its readers to consider another viewpoint, but it lacks the careful analysis that such a topic deserves.
I find myself agreeing with you both. Personally, I found this piece a bit jarring. But that the same time, I think it has successfully made the rounds as it catalyzes a certain emotion into a perspective that people can share.
The dehumanizing nature of it does bother me, though. It's the foundation of any war. And yet, although many wealthy people don't actually feel this way, the distribution of wealth might be seen to be enacted by someone that did.
akbryant54 · 4801 days ago · link ·
I think it's pretty clear the author of the text disagrees with the inequities of the global capitalist order, but it's not really meant to be a careful structural analysis or anything, it's just supposed to be a powerful rhetorical tool to raise class consciousness and motivate the reader to try to change things. Although I may be ascribing my own political beliefs, I'm pretty sure the text was written by some anonymous anarchist several years ago. Can't find a source anywhere.
Going back to your original comment, what I was trying to say was that the rich/poor divide isn't nearly as arbitrary as racial/religious divides. The rich/poor divide is increasingly important to be conscious of, and it's perhaps even more important to be conscious of the stratification that keeps people poor, and all the ways that robs a large chuck of humanity of its potential, which is what the piece is really about.