There’s been some nit-picking about the definition of oligarchy around here lately. Let’s try for some perspective.
What are we arguing about? Are we actually having an argument about who runs things in America?
The argument about who (should) run things is as old as the first time one of our ancestors looked up, pointed a finger, and exclaimed “hill!” (or the cave-woman equivalent of that word).
Since prehistoric times, thems that have power have always sought to defend their right to it, usually by the argument “because it’s mine!” And if that wasn’t good enough, by “because it’s fukkin’ mine!”
The trouble is, there are others who feel the same way, and often their interests come into conflict. And that’s when they need those of us who do not have power to come to their aid. “Let’s you and him fight” is my favorite description of this scenario. War ensues.
Our history as human beings has been the record of these battles. Why does history exist? Because those with power need it to make their arguments more persuasive than “because it’s mine,” or the more advanced concept “because god gave it me!”
Claiming that god gives you the right to power has fallen out of favor in all but a few places. In America, they invented this wonderful fiction that power rests with the people, who, through their vote, assign power to representatives who will do their bidding. It’s become (or maybe was invented as) a clever way to insure that power remains vested with thems that have it.
It isn’t actually much of an opening, but the part where we vote for representatives really is a weak point for those who wish to retain power. There have always been efforts to ensure that only the right people are allowed to vote- and that only the right people are allowed to be representatives.
But just as in the days of old, it comes down to “let’s you and him fight”. Each power group faces the challenge, at prescribed intervals, of assembling a force large enough to overpower their rivals. (Here in America, they make it easier by only allowing two forces to do battle at a time. In other democracies things are much more complicated).
Promises are made in order to enlist a big enough army of voters to defeat the rival party. The nature of these promises evolve over time. The practicality of the promise is unimportant, as long as the candidate can convince enough voters to buy into it. ( I can already hear the “free stuff” comments bubbling up, please hold your fire). But promises aren’t the only means by which to raise an army.
Fear is the big one. Fear of, and hatred for, the enemy is time-tested and true. It’s been going on for a while, and it can get pretty sophisticated. The enemy can be made sub-human, defined as not-us, non-serious, absurd. It’s all there in the history of the thing called public relations.
But I digress. The quibble about the meaning of oligarchy is not relevant to the bigger question of who holds power. It’s obviously not most of us. The answer to this question is as old as the hills, or at least as old as the seven hills- it’s cui bono.