The problem with not being white and rich
These days the trickle down economy is more of a description of what is happening inside the trousers of neoliberals and capitalists
We’re in the last chance saloon folks, and somebody’s nicked all the peanuts…
At times like this, disrespect for authority certainly becomes healthy, because the authorities have decided to get us all killed.
In many industrialised nations exasperated powermongers are asking themselves the same question.
Why can’t everyone be white and rich like us?
They blame the parents, and they may have a point.
A startling number of people with children are demonstrably nowhere near as white and rich as the people in power. Or even as rich and white as the people in power think they should be. The concern is, of course, that those parents are also passing this down to their children.
In so many countries around the world it’s the responsibility of parents to teach their kids how to be white and rich. If they’re not doing that then it’s up to the state to force that learning on them.
You’ll notice the white and rich kids have their own school lunch. With Marmite sandwiches, a couple of snags and Wheet-a-bix in a Buzzy Bee branded box.
White and rich kids don’t tend to nick cars, they get them from their parents.
White and rich people aren’t on benefits. That is, unless you count paying their accountant to get massive tax rebates for lavish dinners and holidays. Or getting business subsidies. Or jobs from their white and rich mates. Or hiding all their money away in “family trusts” in the Cayman Islands. Oh, and not paying any tax on the four rental properties they own.
So it stands to reason that all these problems are being caused by the growing pressure on the rich and white.
After all, we live in fair go societies.
Look at me for example. I wasn’t always white and rich. When I was younger I was just white. I only had my pocket money to get by. I pulled myself up on the fashionable boot straps my parents bought me. I got on with finding my way in a society entirely designed for my benefit.
You don’t hear me complaining.
Sure, we took a lot of people’s countries to create that society. But we gave them Type 2 Diabetes, so we’re even.
In India we gave non-white non-rich people the railways, for God’s sake. Well, we starved them into building them for us, and then they kicked us out, which is kind of the same thing.
We’re over that now. Only non-white and non-rich people use public transport. That’s why New Zealand, for example, has more cars per capita than anywhere else on Earth. That’s why they’re cutting cycle ways and walking options too. And cutting that crazy tax on massively polluting and unnecessary SUVs.
Anyone who isn’t white and rich enough to drive a car the size of a building deserves to cough along in the gutter, where they can get run over by our runaway economy.
We defrauded and stole to acquire multi-trillion dollar landscapes and oceans. Through the odd treaty and concession we’ve paid the original owners back less than one cent in every hundred thousand dollars. Despite our, ahem, reservations, we’ve handed over some small parcels of land we can’t really use for anything. But just in case we change our minds, we’ve included rules that mean the locals can’t use them for anything either. That’s on top of those axe heads and muskets we gave to that bloke who said he owned everything to the horizon back in 1820. What more do you want? Let’s just forget it and move on, as one (white and rich) nation.
Of course we can’t include any of the private land in the negotiations! That’s ours! That’s the rich bit in white and rich, don’t you get it?!
Look, the bottom line is this. We stole your countries fair and square. We’re not giving them back until we’ve destroyed them, or you drive us out. Then we’ll say how we did everything good in your country and look at the state of it now we moved all of its wealth to Buckinghamshire.
So don’t go putting your funny language on too many things round here. It’s just confusing. We’ve named half your country after places in England to which they bear absolutely no resemblance. That should make it clear enough for anyone. And where we haven’t done that, we’ve found ways of completely mispronouncing the local lingo, so let’s not mess with that either.
That way, we all know where we stand.
I agree with much of the rich part, but struggle with the white part. There are numerous historical routes to being rich, surely the point is that some people are rich and others are not. If you see major wealth inequalities as a problem then it doesn't matter very much how someone got there. Lots of non-white people are rich too and they have exactly the same "benefits" you outline. For example, I struggle with people owning the homes of other people "rental properties" no matter who they are. BTW I am also reluctant to judge individuals, as everything is relative. I'm sure some people struggle with me having a well paid, fairly secure government job (as a university professor) and I totally get that.
I found myself cringing because I may think it, but would be unable to say it out loud.
My thesis will share some of this sentiment albeit in a much more subdued way. In the meantime, i'm quite partial to the concept of Hegemonic whiteness. Have a read of:
‘‘What Group?’’ Studying Whites and Whiteness in the Era of
‘‘Color-Blindness’’*
By Amanda E. Lewis