The Allies Of the Billionaires

In this post I offered a brief history of the efforts by the filthy rich to destroy the New Deal. Under Trump those attacks are now aimed at democracy. This post lays out the field of conflict between the filthy rich and normal people. Who are the allies of the filthy rich, and what can we do with that information?

Andrew Mellon stated the program of the billionaires after the 1929 stock market crash:

Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate. It will purge the rottenness out of the system. High costs of living and high living will come down. People will work harder, live a more moral life. Values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up from less competent people.

That’s Trump’s program. In the 1930s, when the attacks began, that program got no traction. The only way the filthy rich could succeed was to find allies who would effectively shield their goals from view. It took a few decades, but they found or created those allies.

It seems to me that there are three groups of collaborators, Theists, Neoliberals, and Grifters. Their motivations are different, and in some ways radically different from the filthy rich, but they all benefit by tagging along with the billionaires.

Theists

There are several groups who teach that the US is a “Christian Nation”, and that it should be a theocracy, or at least that the “laws” of the Bible should govern all Americans, religious or not. Among them are Christian Dominionists, Christian Nationalists, and specific sects. They are supported by groups engaged in lobbying, litigation, and proselytizing. They have their own education structures, including universities and their own media.

There are a number of Christian sects that share some or many of their beliefs. For example, the Catholic Church agrees that all Americans should be governed by their moral teachings about abortion, and that Catholics should be exempt from lnsurance laws that relate to birth control; but retains some sense of the teachings of Jesus on other issues. There are lots of people who agree on specific issues, like equal marriage, and act on them, perhaps by home-schooling, or by supporting theistic lobbying and litigation groups.

The common thread among these groups is the belief that they know the moral truths of the universe, and that the rest of us should/must accept their views. They don’t want anyone reading or thinking anything but what they allow.

Neoliberals

Neoliberas see human beings as homo economicus. They say that human beings have a single goal, maximizing their personal utility. They think that life is a competition for scarce resources, and that the strongest will survive and get the most, and that is just fine. For more, and for a sane alternative, see this post.

Neoliberals fall into two groups. On one side are sellers of goods and services, that is, people who own a business. This group includes investors, the rich who don’t have to work for a living, and the theorists and teachers of this doctrine. The rest of us, the masses, the employees, the consumers, the users, we make up the other side.

The first class has specific goals, mainly getting rid of regulations, and cutting taxes. In this, they agree with the filthy rich. For the rest of us, neoliberalism only offers an explanation of our condition: it’s our fault.

Owner neoliberals differ from theists in two fundamental respects. First, they don’t care what people think or study or theorize about, except for economics. There, they rigidly push their own version, which you studied in Econ 101. Or maybe you learned it in high school, taught from a syllabus prepared by a neoliberal think tank like the Heartland Foundation , which is funded by the Charles G. Koch Foundation and other right-wing operations.

They don’t want you to think clearly about economics, because you will see that they use it to preserve their power, and support the agenda of the filthy rich. They want you to ibelieve that their version of capitalism as foundational to democracy.

One of their tools is distraction. You do things you enjoy, whether it’s shopping, or going to the movies, or playing video games. These are fun and even necessary for a good life. But in excess they keep you from learning and thinking enough to participate in a democracy. You exist solely as a consumer. You work so you can buy entertainment and other stuff.

Expertise only comes with effort, even for the best of us. Here’s an example. At the top of this post is a painting by the American Thomas Kinkade. Take a quick look This painting is typical of the kind of art preferred by sellers of distraction. It doesn’t require anything of the viewer. It oozes with a brain-dead nostalgia, and hides every vestige of the reality of the era it depicts.

Now click through to this painting, Susanna and the Elders by Artemisia Gentileschi, painted in 1610. Look closely at what’s happening Even if you don’t know the story (it’s Daniel 13 in the Catholic Bible ), and even if you don’t know the life history of Artemisia, you can feel the pressing weight of sexual menace. This painting requires attention, and is made more potent with context both of its time, the artist’s experiences, and our me-too age. (Side note: I saw this painting in Paris in May in an exhibit at the Jaquemart André museum. There is also a fairly good copy of Judith Slaying Holofernes,  and the original of Joel and Sisera. And this is a reminder that Wikipedia is a terrific resource and worth a contribution.)

The point here is that owner neoliberals benefit if you limit your thinking to conventional stuff. It’s easier to make and sell profitably. Distraction pacifies you, makes you think you’re living a good life, but hides all other possible ways to live. Those other lives include participating in a functioning democracy.

Worker neoliberals? The billionaires just want you to vote for their candidate, work for them, and buy stuff. People who blame themselves for problems created by the elites don’t demand change. And they keep getting screwed.

Grifters

This is a group of second-rate people who cling to the illusion of competence. There are two main groups here: politicians and their strategists, consultants, and sycophants; and faux intellectuals who swarm in think tanks and even a few universities. Neither group wants you to think clearly about what they are doing.

The politicians want to serve a small club and you aren’t in it. They pretend to serve the median non-thinker in their party, weirdos for the Rs, and centrists for the Ds. Rs fight for the crazies. Ds punch left. Both parties serve their donors first.

The faux intellectuals have all sold out. They surrendered the essence of both the intellectual life and the democratic life, openness to the full implications of life in our society. In exchange, they get money and security. They pretend to provide a principled justification for the policies preferred by their donors, but only the ignorant are fooled.

So?

In any conflict, the first step is to identify the enemy, and to identify those on your side. Then you look for the weak points in the enemy lines. I think this description points to a couple of weaknesses in the alliance against democracy.

1. People who claim to be love liberty don’t want to be ruled by Theists. That includes a lot of neoliberals, both owners and workers. The Theist image of human nature is radically different from that of neoliberals.

2. The interests of owner and worker neoliberals are wildly different. The trick, I think, is to persuade workers that they are entitled to fair treatment as of right, not out of charity.

3. Republican politicians have been pushed so far into lunacy that they are vulnerable to attack from the left by almost any sane politician. Even if Alabama won’t elect a Dem, they should be willing to elect a Republican who won’t hurt them as much as the far-right loon Tommy Tuberville.

4. I don’t think there’s much hope for leaders of the Theists. The combination of self-righteousness and graft makes them impervious to criticism. But that isn’t true of regular people. I think many of them understand the actual teachings of Christianity, and can see where this administration betrays that teaching.

5. In general, I think most of the leaders of the allies are incorrigible. But I also think many followers are reachable, perhaps by shame. I’ll take that up in a later post.

6. What else?

Share this entry
36 replies
  1. Katherine Williams says:

    Isn’t it interesting that few of these individuals or groups actually use facts, basic, examined & studied and proven facts, to base their various philosophies upon? Its all superstition, delusion, illusion, rationalization and psychotic evil.

  2. Snowdog of the North says:

    I think the towering achievement of neoliberal economics is the complete takeover of mainstream economic thought by the “Chicago School.” It is just a lot of tendencious nonsense, but propped up by lots of equations, charts, and graphs, and a unique view of history and law.

    As an example, it is now taken as bedrock legal principle that the sole duty of a corporation is to maximize shareholder value. But that was pulled right out of Milt Friedman’s behind. Before he came up with it in about 1975, there was never any such legal rule.

    • P J Evans says:

      A lot of corporations that bought into his theories (or hired people who did) no longer exist.
      And Reagan bought into Friedman’s crap, too.

    • NerdyCanuck says:

      very well said, so many aspects of the Chicago school have become embedded in our society to the point they are past being “common sense”, they are now considered “common knowledge” or even more plainly, “facts”. when in reality the way we have allowed/nurtured corporations to act in such greedy selfish ways is not true of most of thier history, as it was not true of individuals to be seen only as consumers ‘rationally’ seeking personal gain vs. community members striving for collective prosperity

  3. phichi174 says:

    hey, Ed! i appreciate your thoroughness. just thought that i should bring to your attention the recent rise of geoeconomics:

    The new age of geoeconomics
    Donald Trump’s tariff threats are just part of a much wider shift. Gillian Tett explains why commerce is being subordinated to statecraft — and how we can adapt

    https://www.ft.com/content/762c79d2-f9c9-4e68-9a9c-bcfd443ad63e?accessToken=zwAGOcQXAyAwkc92LHnS-clOaNOanLz9RDrWPg.MEUCIC7CKFqCozzycHNriQbJuI3zhCZVJ9NoheEmqiDtPQaDAiEA_Z8WKcxojd8GS6VNLUnzzUd9cgGQ0snqvUn7uD_unOU&sharetype=gift&token=4b8e9254-ed8f-42fc-ac27-a8eda82510af

    [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the SAME USERNAME and email address each time you comment so that community members get to know you. You attempted to publish this comment using your old username “x174” triggering auto-moderation; it has been edited to reflect your established username to which you changed June 2024. Please check your browser’s cache and autofill; future comments may not publish if username does not match. /~Rayne]

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      It seems more likely that statecraft has been subordinated to commerce and ideology, made subservient to the will of the globe-spanning billionaires, raised to think they can and must rule the world. It’s an expansion, I think, and variation on the 19th c. Social Darwinism.

      Neither social nor Darwinian, the name evokes rule by the heartless and ruthless, by those at the top of the financial pyramid. They assume the role of the king, and seek to persuade others that they rule by divine right, and by the inevitable dictates of economic and biological laws. Rubbish, they rule by power and policy, choices, that can be unmade.

      • phichi174 says:

        “statecraft has been subordinated to commerce and ideology, made subservient to the will of the globe-spanning billionaires”

        exactly

        i’m not promoting this worldview/book, i just thought that since Ed likes to drill deep, he should consider looking into geoeconomics; it’s not a new term (c. 2009), but a little searching shows that the billionaires have re-embraced this ideological worldview with a vengeance. for instance, google has been investing in fusion reactors in furtherance of their dreams of super-intelligent AI. many AI companies are planning to use nuclear (fission) reactors to develop AI and blockchain finance; it’s clear, from the article which basically riffs off Dalio’s book, that they plan to or are presently using AI to devise statecraft, so you might call it Social Darwinism on Hallucinogens

        • misnomer bjet says:

          Just the fact that Gillian Tett is a biz journo & muckety muck at FT is sufficient clue that she represents what people call ‘neoliberalism,’ as Ed defines it.

          The proliferation &; normalization of business journalism mid-20th century (as opposed to say, labor journalism) was a manifestation of what he’s talking about there.

          Good bet there were products of William Casey’s ‘side job’ in that line of work, in the Birch Society library section Charles Koch was so keenly interested in as a young man (according to Jane Mayer’s source in Dark Money). In the 80s-90s we called them neocons. This is a clue as to why I don’t care for that ‘neoliberalism’ term. Neither do I care for the term ‘progressivism,’ for similar reasons.

          Cursory research on Tett turns up another clue indicating the same (and further reason why I dislike both terms); there’s a Tett bio on the ‘beyond neoliberalism’ conference website; that conference title suggests a ‘progressive’ continuation; not a break from ‘neoliberalism,’ or the (Protestant, evangelical) religion-inflected ideology arguably underlying it.

          Your introduction of the term ‘geoeconomics’ to my lexicon struck me as a Putinesque, as in ‘absurd,’ derisive references to ‘politics’ in favor ‘professionals’ -meaning men conducting ‘pure’ business at Mount Athos no less or more than at the UN; as in a ‘progressive’ version of his great use of ‘geopolitics,’ now completely disemboweled of the concept of governance outside corporate governance (the latter being the priority of Tett’s ‘ESG’).

          Not surprising that according to that bio, Tett was a reporter in Russia 2013-2019; nor that ‘statecraft’ likewise disembowels the concept of governance of anything outside corporate governance; and all-too conspicuously, the concept of democracy along with it. This is the language of capitalism as Baudrillard put it, which as Saussure put it, excludes those who do not speak it.

    • Savage Librarian says:

      If you’re able to find a copy, you might also like to take a look at a book published in 1950 entitled: All Honorable Men (The Story of the Men on Both Sides of the Atlantic Who Successfully Thwarted Plans to Dismantle the Nazi Cartel System.)

      The link below provides a review and excerpt that is enlightening.

      Wall Street and the Nazi Cartels – WhoWhatWhy, 10/5/17

      The cases Arnold and his men were talking about had to do with a series of arrangements dating back for a decade or so, to 1926 and 1929, when international agreements among some of the biggest American, British and German firms had quietly divided up the world.

      https://whowhatwhy.org/politics/government-integrity/wall-street-nazi-cartels/

  4. Fiendish Thingy says:

    “ The first class has specific goals, mainly getting rid of regulations, and cutting taxes. In this, they agree with the filthy rich. For the rest of us, neoliberalism only offers an explanation of our condition: it’s our fault.”

    Which is why opposing billionaire’s allies must include supporting primary opponents against every Dem incumbent who espouses the Neoliberal Trojan Horse “Abundance Agenda”. The AA promotes dismantling government regulations (building and zoning codes, labor laws, FDA regs, Environmental Impact Studies) in the guise of “making government work for the people” when the real goal is to accelerate and maximize profits.

    This includes all the Dems the cryptobros purchased to support deregulating the crypto industry. Gallego sits at the top of the list currently, with $10 million in crypto PAC money, but there are 15 other Dem senators who voted yes on the last crypto bill, and another one is coming up in the house…

    Great post, thanks for writing it.

    • Error Prone says:

      Elon’s moving to start his America Party. Amid that, Epstein is a Phoenix. Elon’s image is being reburnished by some online. If an Elon party is formed, and gets say 10% of votes, the other 90% splitting, what’s your guess of what things will be?

      • Mooserites says:

        Without a doubt, Musk will use the forming of a new political party as an inspiration to get off drugs, and rationalize his domestic situation.

        • P J Evans says:

          I’ll believe that when it happens. (He could have done that any time in the last 10 or so years.)

  5. gnokgnoh says:

    I am intrigued by Andrew Mellon’s quasi-religious program. Liquidate labor, stocks, and real estate to purge the system of rottenness? I suppose he must have lost a bundle in the crash and was looking to blame anyone, someone. In a peculiar way, it actually explains Trump, although without the coherence. His program, though, appears more personally malevolent.

    • Snowdog of the North says:

      No, Mellon was that way long before the crash. In fact, his policies as Treasury secretary in the 20’s were a good part of the reason for the crash. He was spectacularly corrupt, and was very much a true believer in the divine right of robber barons to rule.

      • misnomer bjet says:

        Trump is similar to Andrew Mellon’s great nephew (?) RM Scaife, not as grifters or artists themselves, but as easy touches successfully exploited as marks of much more skilled con artists (the ‘grifters’).

        Usefully sheltered & spoiled (neglected & abused) brats born with plated silver spoons (of the nouveau rich) along with chips on their shoulder and a strong sense of being rejected (excluded) by the ‘true’ upper class.

  6. hollywood says:

    Off topic. As we know Trump’s attention span seems to be geared to two week time spans (infrastructure week, peace here, peace there, bunker bombs or not, balancing the budget, etc., etc.) Now he is acting hurt that the Epstein files nonsense is consuming too much of his bandwidth. Great say I.
    But, and this requires a major suspension of disbelief, what if he and Bondi are playing a longer Tar Baby game. There are Epstein files; no there aren’t; stop talking about Epstein: who cares about Epstein? Pam is great; now let’s fire the ethics guy; Pam is still great.
    But what if they wait until the House subpoenas the Epstein stuff and reluctantly produce it (please don’t make us produce the Epstein stuff!) and it shows a lengthy list of Dems and they are revealed to be the blood sucking peds that they must be and were clearly acting up at the pizza parlor and probably rigged the 2020 election?

  7. P-villain says:

    Ed Walker, I appreciate your essays for the breadth and depth of their exposition. Your voice as an essayist is measured but tough. Thank you for being consistently thought-provoking.

  8. ShadeSeeker says:

    Thank you for this terrific and insightful piece.
    It is interesting that for each group there must exist delusions. For instance the Theists ignore that banning abortions causes an increase in maternal and neonatal mortality as well that the pro-billionair economic policies is akin to wholesale stealing from the poor and the middle class and thus breaking a couple of commandments.
    Some of the Neoliberals, e.g Musk, also realise that tarrifs, deficits and deporting workers are counterproductive.
    I think we should also include a separate category for a very special Grifter – Trump. Financially he was struggling in 2016. But now he and his family have increased their wealth manifold. They are deluding themselves if they don’t think that they are not harming America, the world, as well as their own legacy.

    • Wild Bill 99 says:

      To the grifters the rest of us are rubes and suckers, the image being that of lions stalking gazelles. We are here for their consumption.

  9. Thaihome says:

    Matthew Stewart has a 2018 Atlantic article and book describing the 3 classes in the US today. The main problem is 9.9% of upper middle class that makes their money by providing support to the 0.1%.

    • allan_in_upstate says:

      It would be irresponsible not to point out that The Atlantic is owned by Steve Jobs’ widow,
      a member of the 0.00001%.
      The Atlantic was just one platform for a highly nonorganic wave of hit pieces
      on the 9.9%, 9%, or 19% that appeared in the late 2010s,
      laying blame anywhere but at the feet of the ultrarich.

      Of course, in the end it’s all about the power relations.
      Just as Jay Gould could hire half of the working class to kill the other half,
      Laurene Powell Jobs can hire half of the 9.99% to fire the other half:

      https://www.forbes.com/sites/noahkirsch/2020/05/21/journalists-are-angry-about-layoffs-at-the-atlantic-owned-by-billionaire-laurene-powell-jobs/

    • gnokgnoh says:

      It’s not just the 9.9% that provide support to the .1%. I call the 36% of the voting electorate that did not vote (Pew 2025) the mushy center – indifferent, and complacent. Most are likely not registered as either a Democrat (24% of the voters) or Republican (19% of the voters) (USAFacts 2024). They treat politics as an “interest” much like golf or travel (and are not interested); or, they are young and highly distracted by other pursuits; or, they feign disinterest and avoid the subject. They are likely from all income categories. They all buy or use Amazon, Microsoft, and Apple products and typically admire Bezos, Gates, Jobs, Zuckerberg, and Musk. They think Trump is a businessman, who is now president. I know many people like this, they will not do anything until if affects them personally.

      • Wild Bill 99 says:

        Some article I was reading mentioned 89% of right-wing voters supporting some MAGA effort, causing me to think: that would be like about 36% or less of voters. A disappointing number but hardly a mandate let alone a majority.

    • Error Prone says:

      As to three kinds of allies, and what to do, follow the yellow brick road and see the Wizard is the one with the loud speaker and the scarecrow always had a brain, the tin man always had a heart, and the lion always had courage but the three were distracted and led to doubt themselves, by wizardry. But will the Wizard really let Dorothy and Toto use his balloon to escape the strange dream, in the real world? And the seven Dwarfs, (not dwarves), sing Hi HO, off to work we go, in unison, happily? And critical race theory is wrong, but traditional upbringing right? Slaves looking forward to the hot sun and the cotton? It keeps us going if the crop brings a good price for “our” plantation?

  10. JerseyGuy says:

    And the fourth group … racists/white nationalists. Some overlap with the other groups, but they richly deserve their own listing.

    • Rethfernhim says:

      Yes, this is the key fourth group. I think of them as the Confederates. They do overlap some with the Theists and the business owning Neoliberals, but they are driven primarily by racial animosity and xenophobia. Many are not particularly religious, and they have become loyal to the Republican party, who indulges their grievances. I fled my hometown at 17 to get away from them, and they will be hard to reach.

  11. rattlemullet says:

    Today, billionaires and their corporations are, in my opinion, the equivalent to the plantation and factory owners of the 1860 south. Don’t take me wrong certainly todays labor force is the not the equivalent to chattel slavery, the most extreme form of capitalism, a labor force that only required the minimal of food and lodging to the produce goods and services. However the wages paid to today’s labor force is for the most part only provides most with the means of only living day to day and many not even that even though working more than one job at a time. Most workers today cannot freely move from one location to another to gain access to better employment due to insufficient means to do so due lack of money, means of transportation and cost or lack of housing. The stranglehold that billionaires and their corporations have on the America worker prevents most access to heath care, food accessibility let alone any chance for upward mobility. Expand that calculation to the worlds billionaires than you can clearly see that almost half the worlds population are doomed to lifetime of dire poverty.

  12. misnomer bjet says:

    Can’t tell you how much I appreciate what you’re getting at here in terms of vulnerabilities and strategy, in this whole series of posts.

    6. What else?

    I’d start with curiosity vs contempt. The absolute contempt of Republican leadership implicit in tactics their “second-rate” artisans have been so amply rewarded for deploying, for decades.

    I mean, it is not just cynical elitist stupidity, but wildly insulting.

    The fear behind that contempt for the natural curiosity of their own base is palpable, fear of public interest in all of us being well-informed voters.

    That is a deadly vulnerability that Democrats have so maddeningly, bewilderingly, left lying there like Fort Knox with the doors wide open, for decades.

Comments are closed.