> Get rid of all the money, and you get rid of the undue power as well.
That's philosophically, historically and biologically incorrect. Not to mention that it is incredibly naive.
Fights for power happen everywhere in nature. Occasional imbalances are not the problem. The problem is when a certain group or individual manages to concentrate so much power that they get control over groups.
> That means they have their power through some means other than wealth accumulation; popular election or something.
Although I could challenge you on this idea (quick, tell me one "poor" politician who was elected and continued poor after taking office), this is not the type of "power" that we are talking about, is it? In any reasonable democracy, the only "power" from an elected officer is the one vested by the people, for the people. Any elected officer that abuses their position for their own personal gain should be removed from office.
The "power" we are talking about here is the power to do things uncontested, or to get other people to act in ways that are against their own interests and values. This is more visible with rich businessmen like Bezos and Musk, but it also happens via conglomerates like Disney that use their media and news properties to openly mold society in ways that serve them, or the Union leader who puts any of their opponents on a no-work list.
He was only poor relative to other presidents. But even before it he was a judge, and after it he managed to turn his memoirs into very lucrative book deals.
That's philosophically, historically and biologically incorrect. Not to mention that it is incredibly naive.
Fights for power happen everywhere in nature. Occasional imbalances are not the problem. The problem is when a certain group or individual manages to concentrate so much power that they get control over groups.
> That means they have their power through some means other than wealth accumulation; popular election or something.
Although I could challenge you on this idea (quick, tell me one "poor" politician who was elected and continued poor after taking office), this is not the type of "power" that we are talking about, is it? In any reasonable democracy, the only "power" from an elected officer is the one vested by the people, for the people. Any elected officer that abuses their position for their own personal gain should be removed from office.
The "power" we are talking about here is the power to do things uncontested, or to get other people to act in ways that are against their own interests and values. This is more visible with rich businessmen like Bezos and Musk, but it also happens via conglomerates like Disney that use their media and news properties to openly mold society in ways that serve them, or the Union leader who puts any of their opponents on a no-work list.