Showing posts with label alexandria ocasio-cortez. Show all posts
Showing posts with label alexandria ocasio-cortez. Show all posts

16 Sept 2021

Should We Tax the Rich, Eat the Rich, or Kill the Poor?

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in her 
Tax the Rich dress (Met Gala 2021)
 
 
I suppose the slogan tax the rich that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez had emblazoned across the back of her off-the-shoulder white designer gown in large blood red letters at the Met Gala earlier this week is a more reasonable-sounding version of the radically-cannibalistic eat the rich, a phrase attributed to the 18th-century French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau [1] which remains popular within anti-capitalist circles concerned about class inequality and hungry for revolutionary change.        
 
However, more reasonable-sounding or not, tax the rich is an equally asinine remark, if only because the rich are already taxed; certainly on their income, if, arguably, at an insufficient level upon accumulated and inherited wealth, which is, I think, a separate (and more important) issue.  
 
As an American politician, AOC is obviously concerned primarily with what's happening in the United States. But, if I may, I'd like here to present a few facts and figures concerning the income tax paid by the richest members of society in the UK. My purpose isn't to praise or express my gratitude to those who earn obscene sums whilst others scrape by on a pittance, but merely - as AOC would say - to start a conversation on this issue ... 
 
Every year, HM Revenue and Customs publish an analysis of the income earned and tax paid by by UK citizens. In 2016/17, for example, £174 billion was raised in income tax [2]. Of that amount, nearly a third - £52.5 billion - came from the 381,000 highest earning individuals (i.e., those on salaries of more than £150,000 per annum). And that is more than all the income tax raised amongst the first 20 million lower earning individuals (£50 billion).            
 
As The Guardian's money editor, Patrick Collinson, notes, if you examine things in London, the truth of this matter is even more inconvenient to those who, for ideological reasons, like to believe that the highest earners don't pay their fair share:  
 
"The city has 4.2 million income tax payers, but just 87,000 individuals earning over £200,000 a year paid nearly half the £43.8bn income tax raised in the capital. It’s uncomfortable to say it, but if we lose all those absurdly paid investment bankers [...] the hit to the public purse will be painful, as they are clearly paying vast amounts to the Treasury. Those London bankers, lawyers and their ilk paid more income tax in 2016-17 than the entire sum raised from every income tax payer in Scotland and Wales combined." [3]
 
And so, simply shouting tax the rich - or eat the rich - is as politically suspect as the secret fantasy of killing the poor is amongst members of the super-rich who would sooner exterminate those in need than provide funds to help eradicate poverty ...  

 
 
The sun beams down on a brand new day / No more welfare tax to pay 
Unsightly slums gone up in flashing light / Jobless millions whisked away 
At last we have more room to play / All systems go to kill the poor tonight [4]
 
 
Notes
 
[1] Pierre Gaspard Chaumette, President of the Paris Commune, is believed to have given a speech on 14 October 1793 (i.e., during the Reign of Terror), in which he quoted Rousseau as saying: Quand le peuple n'aura plus rien à manger, il mangera le riche.
 
[2] I am using figures given by Patrick Collinson writing in The Guardian (9 March 2019): click here.  Those who wish to find more recent figures should visit the government website concerned with income and tax: click here
 
[3] Patrick Collinson, ibid

[4] 'Kill the Poor', written by Jello Biafra and East Bay Ray, was the third single released by the Dead Kennedys (Cherry Red Records, 1980). Lyrics © Decay Music / Bmg Vm Music Ltd.
      Click here to play the re-recorded version on the band's first album, Fresh Fruit for Rotting Vegetables (Cherry Red Records / Alternative Tentacles, 1980). 
 
 
For a sister post to this one on AOC and radical chick, click here.
 

15 Sept 2021

Radical Chic: On Puncturing the Fourth Wall of Excess and Spectacle with AOC

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in her 
Tax the Rich dress (Met Gala 2021)  
 
 
One of the results of the conjunction between politics and fashion is the sloganised garment. 
 
That is to say, an item of clothing printed or painted with an ideological statement in the (magical) belief that the right few words can help bring about social and cultural change (or, at the very least, piss a few people off).  

Hugely influenced by the designs of McLaren and Westwood - and members of the Clash on the sleeve of White Riot - I used to buy into this belief myself and would regularly paint punk-situationist slogans on the clothes I wore: click here.
 
But when Katharine Hamnett started producing her line of oversized politically-correct t-shirts - Save the World, Choose Life, etc. - it was clear that a once genuinely provocative practice had become purely an exercise in virtue signalling.   
 
And here in 2021, at the 75th annual Met Gala, things reached a depressing new low when Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez appeared in a couture white gown designed by Aurora James (creative director and founder of luxury brand ​​Brother Vellies) emblazoned with the words Tax the Rich in large red letters. 
 
For this wasn't a political use of fashion, but a fashionable use of politics and it doesn't make AOC an anti-capitalist icon bravely confronting the wealthy at their own event - minimum ticket price $30,000 - it makes her a clown invited for their amusement. Whilst she posed for pictures, protestors from Black Lives Matter were (literally) being arrested in the streets outside.  
 
Defending her decision to attend the Gala and wear the dress, AOC claimed on Instagram that she had not only started a conversation about taxing the rich, but 'punctured the fourth wall of excess and spectacle', which is a rather lovely sentence, albeit one that reveals the depth of her pomposity and self-delusion. 
 
One thinks back, in closing, to that marvellous term coined by Tom Wolfe in an essay from fifty years ago - radical chic - to describe the adoption and promotion of trendy left-wing political causes made by numerous celebrities, socialites, and intellectuals ... [1]
 
Unlike actual militants and real-life revolutionaries, those parading their radical chic are mostly interested in advancing their own position and being seen to be what we now describe as woke. It is, ultimately, a form of decadence - and insulting to the very people on whose behalf they claim to speak [2].      
 
 
Notes

[1] See Tom Wolfe, 'Radical Chic: That Party at Lenny's', New York (June 8, 1970): click here to read online. 
      The above essay can also be found in Wolfe's Radical Chic & Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers, (Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1970) and/or The Purple Decades, (Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1982). 
    
[2] Just to be clear: as much as the hypocrisy of someone like OAC can be galling, I'm not writing here in support of actual militants and/or real-life revolutionaries - i.e., the kind of political ascetics and terrorists of ideology who resort to violence in order to achieve their aims and impose their beliefs.
 
For a sister post to this one on whether we should tax the rich, eat the rich, or kill the poor, click here    


11 Feb 2019

Marxism Today

Ash Sarkar and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: fresh of face - but stale of idea ...


I.

Would you Adam and Eve it? Communism has been given a 21st-century makeover!

Out with the bearded old men calling for armed revolution and in with the fresh faced young women, such as Ash Sarkar and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, soft-pedaling their programme of democratic socialism - i.e., an anti-capitalist fusion of feminism, environmentalism, and identity politics.

It sounds fun and sexy. And I'm pleased that both the above claim to be anti-authoritarian. But, unfortunately, there's still something troubling about the fact that they seem so assured of their own ideological positions, their own righteousness, their own woke-utopian visions of society.     

It's troubling too that these intelligent, well-educated women seem so ignorant of - or wilfully blind to - the history of communism in practice: a history not only of abject economic failure, but also of terror, atrocity, and genocide, often carried out in the name of the highest idealism and the promise of a bright new day to come.    


II.

In a sense, when it comes to the question of socialism, I agree with Lawrence; "like most things, [it] has various sides to it", but can ultimately be regarded as the expression of two great desires:

Firstly, there is the "generous desire that all [people] shall eat well and sleep well and fare well all their lives". This we might call the socialism of Love; one that sincerely longs for justice and equality.

Secondly, however, there's the desire to smash everything and return the world to Year Zero. This is what we might term the socialism of Hate; i.e. that which Nietzsche characterised as anarcho-nihilism motivated by ressentiment and the will to revenge.

Lawrence says that a generous model of loving socialism in theory provides the "best form of government". Unfortunately, however, when we examine the historical experience of the last 100 years, we discover that it's the latter - the socialism of malice and misery - that triumphs everytime.    

It's for this reason that we cannot help preferring Trump's America, for all its faults, to any of the totalitarian regimes that still wave the red flag today. As Suzanne Moore says, communism may be hip again amongst certain sections of the population, but until it guarantees individual freedom and the right to dance, then count me out, comrade.  


See: 

D. H. Lawrence, 'Epilogue' to Movements in European History, ed. Philip Crumpton, (Cambridge University Press, 1989), pp. 261-62.

Suzanne Moore, 'Communism is hip again - but until it means liberty, count me out, comrade', The Guardian (24 July 2018): click here to read online.