Guest Post: Hating The Rich

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by James E. Miller of the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada,

In the midst of the extramarital affair scandal involving former CIA director David Petraeus, the mansion which mistress-turned-media target Paula Broadwell is hiding out in was revealed by the Daily Mail. This $2.3 mansion contains seven bedrooms and five bathrooms and is owned by Broadwell’s brother. Some are pointing to the mammoth home as yet another symbol of the vast inequality that pervades the West. It is said that to see the house is to have a glimpse at how the “other side” lives- the other side being subtly hinted to as that of the undeserving bourgeoisie.

In many respects, much of this loathing is well deserved for Ms. Broadwell and her brother Stephen Kranz. A former trial lawyer for the U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division and Chief Counsel for the District of Columbia’s Office of Tax and Revenue, Kranz is currently a partner at the D.C. law firm Sutherland. Much of his career has focused on the tax code. It appears that he once used the code as a weapon to shakedown other Americans in the service of Uncle Sam. Today, he advocates for taxpayers but the fact remains that he owes his standard of living to the formalized thieving racket the state labels taxation.

So to some degree, a bit of detestation is warranted at Kranz. But consider former presidential candidate Mitt Romney. During the beauty pageant (otherwise called campaign) to become president, the former Governor’s immense wealth was used a basis for attack. He was regularly mocked for the various homes he owned and his net worth of around $250 million. He was criticized for being out of touch with how the majority of the country lived and felt. In other words, he wasn’t a real man of the people.

To that, this writer can only say good riddance. The so-called “people” have been indoctrinated to see wealth as something to take by government force. Romney is by no means a good man- good men rarely make a run for public office. He fell into a great deal of income through second-hand government contracts and political connections. But his intimacy with the state is not why he faced an onslaught of censure. It was simply because he had something few else do - riches.

And because his house was bigger than most, his car collection larger than others, and his tastes more refined, he was hated by the media establishment. Even Romney’s de facto supporters who constituted the “conservative press” were careful to not draw attention to Romney’s wealth. Such would not inspire the hard laborer to rush to the polls in a fevered passion. President Obama ran a campaign based on handing out tickets for an auction of stolen goods. The incumbent’s success on Election Day came as no surprise to anyone familiar with mankind’s universal mannerism of desiring something in the now rather than later.

Western culture is presently defined by many things; one of which being an instilled sense of extreme jaundice toward wealth. No doubt Karl Marx would beam with pleasure in seeing how the contemporary bourgeoisie is regarded with hateful suspicion. His plan of crippling class warfare is slowly taking hold. This isn’t for the reasons Marx envisioned however. In his incredibly flawed understanding, the bourgeoisie would suck the very living out of the proletariat by keeping their hands clenched around society’s capital.

Instead, the accumulation of capital has financed the advent of modern technology. Man now lives longer, consumes more calories, is more mobile, and has ready access to a centuries worth of information. But rather than aid in the masses’ search for truth, the rise in convenience has made the species soft. The ignorant now cling to juvenile appeals of nationalism and the prospect of having government officials redistribute wealth in the name of justice.

Before the twentieth century and the ascendance of the all-intrusive state, sumptuous living was typically seen as something to aspire to. It aroused jealously which fueled a lust for reaching such heights of luxury; not to pick away at success. With its various schemes of theft, the state has institutionalized that which would be considered a crime if done by private hands. It has attracted those who not only relish in stealing by legal decree but also the voters who have a fetish for knocking those more successful down a peg. In short, it has turned envy into a laudable trait which can in turn be used to mask some political scheme.

A great deal of this can be attributed to the government granting of privilege to the well-connected. As long as the state exists, there will be a class of people who use political means to acquire vast swaths of riches. Their opulence feeds the feelings of animus the average man has towards the moneyed. It is through democracy that this hate is put into concrete action. As Albert Jay Nock writes,

Above all things the mass-mind is most bitterly resentful of superiority. It will not tolerate the thoughts of an elite; and under a political system of universal suffrage, the mass-mind is enabled to make it antipathies prevail by the sheer force of numbers.

Democracy isn’t just mob rule; it is a social system which the most craven tendencies of man are appealed to for political success. Instead of standing true for a justice that is based on a set of moral principles, the elected official will sink to whatever cesspool of indecency is necessary to garner just a few more votes. Democracy may start off as a means for self-determination but it quickly devolves into a race to the bottom fueled by endless promises to fill the public trough for the swine to feed at.

The bourgeoisie values of prudence and temperance are no longer respected in the Western world. They are seen as anachronistic and not in tune with the needs of society. This is a self-defeating attitude that will only lead to further impoverishment. For as long as success is punished and high time preferences are rewarded, the capacity for productive efforts deteriorates.

Coercive egalitarianism based on ill feelings of Schadenfreud is a cancer. There is no conceivable benefit in everyone being equal. There is only one moral social system and that is free, unadulterated capitalism which gives everyone the chance to improve their own standing. Anything less represents the triumph of the idiotic masses over good sense.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
BLOTTO's picture

The world can NO LONGER afford the global elite.



falak pema's picture

well said. If we move back in human regression big time, watch out for the resurgence of cannibalism; the lean eat the fat. 

Radical cure to obesity! 

"Yonder Cassius has a lean and hungry look!" ...Yikes! 

Publicus's picture

All wealth is created by labor.

There's really only two kinds of people in a capitalist economy: creators of wealth vs accumulators of wealth.

philipat's picture

My wealth was created by MY labour. And, I must say, I am quite enjoying it .

CH1's picture

All wealth is created by labor.


Digging holes then filling them is labor, and it creates zero wealth.

Labor is an important component of wealth, but without knowledge, will, adaptation and cooperation, it is useless.


midtowng's picture

Just because not all labor creates wealth doesn't discount the fact that labor creates all wealth.

CH1's picture

Labor, as in physical work (see a couple of posts below on definitions) is PART of wealth creation. It does not "create wealth." Rather, it contributes to creating wealth.

jeff montanye's picture

capital is stored labor.  natural resources are part too.  start with the birth of agriculture and think it out.

however the post's "Before the twentieth century and the ascendance of the all-intrusive state, sumptuous living was typically seen as something to aspire to. It aroused jealously which fueled a lust for reaching such heights of luxury; not to pick away at success." i think misreads history.  

the french revolution didn't just seem to aspire to the luxury of the ancien regime.  there was some serious picking away at success. in the u.s. the assassination of two presidents in a generation (garfield, mckinley) and near constant labor riots speak of more than aspiration to wealth. as with romney, "success" is not just or, perhaps, even primarily, about hard, smart work.  it is sometimes about being born into advantage (as i was).  

All Risk No Reward's picture

This article makes no sense without addressing the fraudulent debt based monetary system - Debt Money Tyranny:

Why should the citizenry have to borrow its "money," at interest such that the debt is mathematically unpayable, from a bunch of psychopathic criminal international banksters?

The Mises guys don't "get it" and play the role of controlled opposition so long as they don't beat on this table.

Note to Ron Paul - The Fed isn't stupid, they are traitorous criminals.  They are looting the nation dry.  They aren't trying to prop up the economy that can't be propped up, they are looting us dry before the eventual collapse that they orchestrated so they can buy stuff up for pennies on the dollar and consolidate the country under their corporate fronts.

This lack of insight and pro corporate stance of Mises, etc...  is likely the reason that the Rockefeller Foundation funded Mises and the reason Mises accepted cash from the devil's minions.

Now, I like much of what Ron Paul says.  I look forward to Lew Rockwell's podcasts.  They do much good.  But until they expose the mechanics and criminality, not of "fiat," but of debt based money and expose the Big Finance Capital cartel that runs it (along with every major corporation - including Rockwell's beloved Amazon), the people will be left confused on shifting sand.

Rockwell should expose and boycott Amazon as Big Finance Capital front corporation...  part of thw Wizards's "curtain" of deception, as it were.  Instead, he grovels to it because he makes a little cash while "Rome" at the hands of the Owners and Controllers of companies such as Amazon.

I saw a documentary (Daniel Ellsburg: The Most Dangerous Man in America?) where a Vietnamese farmer's daughter was killed in the Vietnam War.  He was distraught and wanted the reporter to give LBJ his daughter's shirt so he could know the hell and evil that he was unleashing on animal based farming community.  In the background was a village mate drinking Coca-Cola.  Guess who is majority owner and controler of Coca-Cola?  The same crowd that is majority owner and controler of the MIC that took Operation Noerthwoods (look it up and read it!) live against Vietnam!  The villager was financing the very people who was bombing his village!

Rockwell plays the village mate roll by shilling for Amazon.

He should know better than to actively promote the Big Finance Capital funding and societal debt saturating mechanism - but the controlled opposition has apparently never delivered this insight. 

Dr. Sandi's picture


Labor is an important component of wealth, but without knowledge, will, adaptation and cooperation, it is useless.

Acquiring knowledge, gaining the will, learning to adapt and cooperate are ALL LABOR. They are not handed out by the tooth fairy. Therefore, they are LABOR.

Willful misunderstanding and repetition of this looter crap is what makes it possible for the loathsomely lazy to live off the labor of others.

You don't have to dig a hole to be laboring. But you DO have to be doing something useful that creates wealth. Actual wealth, not just money. Something of value must be the result, whether it's food, trucks, socks or salad shooters. Or even organizing others to create something of value, this also counts as labor.

Digging a hole and filling it back in isn't labor, its exercise. And most likely part of an exercise program backed by government funds, funds taken from the labor of real people.

People who socially engineer other people to create wealth for them are certainly laboring. However, people who move stock certificates around to the detriment of the value of the company represented by that stock are not laboring, they are looting. They create no wealth, even if they are given much money in exchange for their frauds.

Labor creates something of value. If your guidance of others' labor creates something of value, then you are also laboring. If your guidance of others' labor destroys capital, then you are looting, not laboring.

When you watch a ripe apple fall to the ground, you are loafing. When you pick it up for later use, you are laboring. Even though you had nothing to do with the planting or care of the tree, your simple act of putting the apple into use gives it value and is, therefore, labor.

And if you let the apple rot in your pocket, you are now an arm of the government.

CH1's picture

Getting Knowledge = Labor is not, in my experience, a common definition. If we are to take that definition, no problem.

willwork4food's picture

+1 to you and the good Doctor.

PrintingPress's picture

So you've never had to study for a test?  Taking all of that information in the book and turning it into "useful" knowledge? 

falak pema's picture

capitalisation of knowledge requires labour. In fact all productive capitalisation is labour intensive. Human energy is the source of all riches; as of all poverty other than acts of God; or Venus, if you believe in the she-version both of all-knowing-one as of the devil. 

I'll have my devil naked on the rocks. 

Ctrl_P's picture

+1 for Cassius.


Welcome to the new boss, same as the old boss.

slaughterer's picture

Let's all enjoy this article over a bottle of 1990 Lafite Rothschild and a Twinkie. 

nmewn's picture

I can't believe this article rated so low.

So again I'll throw it out there...if the state is going to confiscate wealth...why would the welfare mom even bother playing the lottery?


Does my socialist/statist, cowardly, junker have a comment to make or does he prefer to manipulate opinion from the shadows as usual?

Lord Koos's picture

"Before the twentieth century and the ascendance of the all-intrusive state, sumptuous living was typically seen as something to aspire to."

Shouldn't you start up the front loader before depositing such a large pile of bullshit?  

Does the word "revolution" ring a bell?

Tsukato's picture

I'm really sick of all the "have nots" bitching and whining, and crying for revolution. American Homo Penguinicus is reaping what he deserves. Too many imbiciles lived way beyond their means thinking the party would never end. Well it ended, and how's that working out for y'all? Now you cry things aren't fair. Fuck all of you socialist bitches!

Ident 7777 economy's picture

Also note many of the 'have nots' are posting WAY above their (intellectual) means as well ...

Incubus's picture

I'm a have and I did little to get this way; lolinheritance.


Jealous? Yeah. GoCapitalism!

All Risk No Reward's picture

But they aren't getting socialism, they are getting oligarch controlled financial (hardening rather quickly to become a militarized police state) authoritarian fascism.

Rather than falling prey to the socialsim / capitalsim false dialectic, how about reject the false narrative and point people towards what is real.

Everyone who isn't a psychopathic international banking cartel owner, controller or minion has a Debt Money Tyranny beef with the current wicked system.  The following chart explains it in sufficient detail:

Detb Money Tyranny:

Got that?  Your country, your state, your city and your community are being driven into bankruptcy through a mathematically unpayable debt con game.

Now, you seem to think you are "safe" from the consequences of such.  For a time you should be.

But suggest you look long term - as these criminals continue to wipe out people below your financial level, you get closer and closer to their bullseye.

Yes, the financial morons were played like the greedy, irrational, miseducated fools they were.  They were punked.  They were chumps.  They were fools.  But they have no POWER.


We need those who can know to have perspective and beat this drum exposing the monetary fraud until it becomes common place.

The whole "socialism / capitalism" false narrative is a 100% waste of time BECAUSE IT ISN'T REAL.

nmewn's picture

"Does the word "revolution" ring a bell?"

Bring it on Koos, it seems that's what your heart is set on...a little less talk and a lot more action.

"Before the twentieth century and the ascendance of the all-intrusive state, sumptuous living was typically seen as something to aspire to."

Pretty sure he said "typically". He didn't say all. If you want to live lke a hermit and dumpster dive the rest of your life, go right ahead, no ones stopping you.

Rusty Diggins's picture

"If you want to live lke a hermit and dumpster dive the rest of your life, go right ahead, no ones stopping you."


I don't know about that, the Santa Fe police just rousted me from the Trader Joes dumpster, shit that meat was going to go bad in another day.

mark mchugh's picture

James Miller is too much of an idiot to talk to or about.  And seriously, I'm getting pretty fed up with people who can't think their way out of a wet paper bag.  Know why banana republics suck?  Because they allow wealth to be concentrated in the hands of an undeserving few.

I'm sure that those blood-suckers believe they earned their wealth too.

Ten trillion psuedo-dollars have been printed up and handed out by the US government in the last twelve years.  Contrary to what you may think, most of that money didn't go to buying ghetto-folk blocks of cheese.  Nope.  It goes to well-connected  douche-bags like Romney.

No huge deficits...No mega-bucks Mitt Romney.  How can you not get that?

He is the true poster-child of the welfare state.  Literally too fucking stupid to understand that his wealth was acquired from the debts government has burdened millions with.

We paid "Moon Base" Gingrich 1.5 MILLION dollars to write a paper on the GSEs.  You wanna talk about "wealth distribution"?  There you go...

As an American doing his best to pull his own weight while the government heaps more and more debt on my family's back, which do you think I'm more pissed about: The black kid who got a cheeseburger tonight or the vulture who got rich shipping jobs overseas, raiding pensions and hiding money in the Cayaman's?

Now I ask you, which one's the abomination of the system in your mind?

Tsukato's picture

You are too fucking much!

He is the true poster-child of the welfare state.  Literally too fucking stupid to understand that his wealth was acquired from the debts government has burdened millions with.

You would do the same if you had half a brain.

As an American doing his best to pull his own weight while the government heaps more and more debt on my family's back, which do you think I'm more pissed about: The black kid who got a cheeseburger tonight or the vulture who got rich shipping jobs overseas, raiding pensions and hiding money in the Cayaman's?

You're a fucking fool. In any system you must know the game is rigged, and get yourslf in the position to profit from the corruption. If you're not smart enough to figure that one out, why the hell are you having kids for chrisstsakes?!

Shipping jobs abroad is a bad thing!? Why?! It's a stupid thing to pay more for labor than is necessary. Are you for real???????

And also, what have you got against someone trying to keep the fruits of their labor? Should we willingly give it away to the less intelligent, the lazy?! Fuck no. Pull your head outa your ass.

Lastly, the black kid who got a cheeseburger. What are you... some kinda racist? Blacks aren't smart enough to earn the money to buy a burger?! You really are shameless. However, if you think my money should be used to buy him a burger, then fuck him and you. People of your ilk really needn't add to the gene pool. You should go out and kill that kid, and then turn the gun on yourself. Fucking socialist degenerate.

Rusty Diggins's picture

So the only reason to live, "to suceed" is to give up your will and "play the corrupt system"?  Right, I'm heading back to the ship then.

Tsukato's picture

I think I come across as rather one dimensional in this posting. Actually, I am looking at things in a completely different way than most folks here. Through personal experience, and years of meditation, I understand that none of this exists actually except in Mind. There is no actual real ness in this existence we take as reality. That being the case, anything that we are seeing, experiencing, etc. has no inherent worth as in being right or wrong. There is no right or wrong, no birth or death. The only thing that exists in this domain of mind is "the game". In the game, one tries to get what one wants by any means. Limitation has no place here. If you limit yourself, it's your own self induced handicap. So anyway, though I am no fan of the shitheads milking the system, I have to agree with what they are doing because I would probably do the same thing in their situations. That actually includes the uber rich talking about culling 90% of the population. Sounds about right to me, and will make the game more interesting to boot.
Ps... I'm also an American living in china. I understand the virtues and benefits of corruption. It's a beautiful, streamlined way of getting action done. Only chumps and delusionals don't see it's merits.

mark mchugh's picture

I think you meant years of masturbation.

mark mchugh's picture

 I can only hope you are getting paid well for blasting out cranial diarrhea.  It would be tragic to think that you actually believe what you wrote.

Me socialist?  You're too funny.  I'm what both socialists and psuedo-capitalists fear most:  Zero Deficits!

philipat's picture

Agreed except that 1990 wasn't a very good year, can we make that a 1982? Oh, and can I skip the Twinkie for some foie gras?

willwork4food's picture

How 'bout a nice cold Heineken instead?  I'll buy the nuts. Pussies.

Qualitative Tightening's picture

I understand your qualms with said 'global elite', but, anyone who thinks the 'global elite' are the only people with wealth is just being one of the misinformed sheep that this piece discusses. Entrepreneurs, via the free markets (whats left of them at least), use their creative talents to create businesses, and if successful, they end up creating many jobs (careers) and are rewarded by said free markets with wealth. This is not a bad thing, but rather something of great logic and beauty, and ultimately we need more of it, not less.

geewhiz's picture

Sums it up. People with a redistributionist bent oftentimes confuse croneyism with capitalism.

Call me Ishmael's picture

According to Ray Dalio, America has $3 trillion of money and $50 trillion of debt.

Delusions only have truth that we afford them. Let's talk about who issues debt. This argument is tired. Let's figure out a more just way to make food and the finer things flow from the scumbags to those who make life a place for the living.

We have abundant resources and oceans on both sides of us. The apparatus the criminals built on top of the constitution is teetering. The future can be bright.

Instead of bringing all these beached whales food we could be carving them up and eating them.

archon's picture

So, let's see if I get this...  Romney earns money turning around struggling businesses, and pays taxes on his income earned from that.  Some of those taxes are used to pay for government contracts, some of which are awarded to Romney's company, which then allows him to recover some of the money he paid in taxes in the first place.

Obama never works a real job in his entire life, and grows fat and rich at the publich trough.  Obama earns his "living" by hating rich people (except those who become rich the way he did, of course) and causing class warfare.  All the income he earns was first taken from someone like Romney by way of taxation, and all the taxes he pays are in reality taxes of taxes.

Although I may concede that no "global elite" are without their flaws, it seems to me that some global elite are preferable to others.

RockyRacoon's picture

I rated the article a 2 for its cliched and trite arguments.  I give your comment about the same for your narrow and partisan view.  Everything can't be boiled down to thought morsels.  A broader and more studied consideration of all the situations has to be the rule, or any semblance of a solution will appear further and further away.  Cause and effect aren't so simple as either you or the article would like.

Besides, I have a particular hatred for plagiarism:

"Every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods."

 -- H. L. Mencken

Dr. Sandi's picture

I rated it 1 because of the source. Same asshole, different shit.

archon's picture

I love Mencken, he also said, "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard. "

If you're indifferent to the quality of the "global elites" that you would have to govern you, then you only assure that you will be governed by nothing but the very worst.

Anusocracy's picture

Mencken was incredible.


Democracy is the art and science of running the circus from the monkey cage.
H. L. Mencken

archon's picture

HAHAhaha...  good one.  How about:

"The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it. "

Clark Bent's picture

Truly, if we are to be ruled, can't we find a person and program that is worthy of some respect? Must the leader always be the stupidest, lowest-class, vilest douchebag locatable? Is there anything about the POS in the WH that isn't odious and embarrassing? The man is a cretin on all apparent levels, public and private. Odious rotter.  

Cathartes Aura's picture

the system describes the participants, and the system is rotten to the core.

as are all who participate.  act accordingly.  you may just be the "ruler" you've been waiting for.

MillionDollarBoner_'s picture

I don't have a problem with wealth.

I do have a big problem with ill-gotten gains.

Especially as it is a nil-sum outcome I.e. if one person gets richer by being connected, crooked or swindling - others must be the poorer for it in equal amount.

Free Jon Corzine!!!

Joebloinvestor's picture

Hating the wealthy?


How they got it, YES.

Wether they are prosecuted for it?

Yes again.

I am still pissed that Hillary turned $10k into $100k and there was never a record of trades.

They should have just given her the money in a bowling bag.

SWCroaker's picture

You (and I, and the 18 or so who have bothered thumbs up) are in a minority: we know that "rich" and "ill gotten" are two often but not always overlapping circles on a Venn diagram.

I'm sadly coming to the conclusion that the article's author *is* correct; hate of "rich" is being deliberately promoted as a tool by a numerical few at the top (ironically most of which might be rightly judged to be "rich" from "ill gotten" means), in an effort to grab and solidify power.  Entitlements are a cancer that self perpetuate.

Blankman's picture

swcroaker - what you wrote is exactly how I have been trying to organize it in my head.  Who started the whole hate of rich?  Probably some rich guy trying to divide the masses even further.  For instance Mitt Romney's net worth is reported at 250 million how does this compare to Barack OBama's net worth of 12 million.  Barack is also a millionaire but because he is only worth 12 mil he is not considered rich?  12 mill is quite rich if you ask me.  I'm not trying to pit Dems vs Repubs but just show that politics are sports for the wealthy.  You sit around watching football on monday night while these guys sit around trying to gain power for themselves on a nightly basis.  Politics = rich guy sports.

Clark Bent's picture

Marxism has always been the hobby of rich-kid ne'er do wells. Only a true idiot can beleive the nonsense spouted, but a cunning scumbag can detect its potential for manipulating the stupid and the envious. First, advance a consumer culture where materialism is the measure of personal worth. Disdain honor and religion, teach people that what they want right now is the most sacred principle. Tell them they owe nothing to their parents, their spouses and their inadvertent offspring. Once you've laid the groundwork, you now have in your hands the motivators, which are lucre, self-righteous revenge, and absolution from any conscience. Come as a Messiah and tell the vermin you can offer them flashy status-pregnant consumer articles and rationalization for their roles in their own debased existence. Suggest to them that they have some exalted status based on their indolence, romanticism, and envy...let them think that you are just like them. Maybe run a Negro for President, after all they are so authentic and real. Then contact them on their cell phones you have provided, just like you're all buddies and now we're going to go out and kick ass on stodgy old civilization. Then split the spoils. There is no tomorrow. Osama is dead and GM is alive. 

Cathartes Aura's picture

PS:  if you genuinely believe having a "Negro for President" is part of the/problem, then you're playing into their hands Clark.

Obama is intentional - the other blue team "choice" might have been a woman, equally a target for white male ire and resentment.

think about it.