SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
"Life in this entitlement environment shapes how the awesomely affluent interact with the world. They come to see their privilege as the proper order of the universe. The wealthy deserve to be served. Those without wealth do not. If those without wealth did rate as deserving, after all, wouldn't they already be wealthy?" (Photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
Why Do So Many Super Rich Despise the Poor?
Donald Trump's putdown of suffering Puerto Ricans reflects a mindset that has long afflicted the awesomely affluent.
Oct 06, 2017
Only days after the horrific aftermath of Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico, Donald Trump unleashed a tweet that outraged many but surprised few. With millions of Puerto Ricans without minimal food, water, and fuel, Trump lashed out against those islanders literally begging for more federal help.
"They want," Trump snarled, "everything done for them."
How terribly insensitive, millions of us on the mainland muttered in response. But how predictably Trump, we all sighed. The Donald being Donald.
But we're making a mistake, a big mistake, when we react that way. Trump's graceless insensitivity doesn't just reflect Donald being Donald. His comments reflect Donald being rich. Super rich.
Remember Mitt Romney? In his 2012 campaign for the White House, the phenomenally rich Romney displayed the same basic mindset as the Donald, his successor as the GOP Presidential nominee. Some "47 percent" of Americans, Romney told a gathering of his big-time contributors, "believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it."
Romney's "welfare bum"-style comments came in a private, behind-closed-doors, no-press-allowed session, a setting where Mitt and his fellow rich could let their hair down and share what they really feel. But why do they feel that way? Why do the rich so often see those who lack the wealth they have in abundance as ingrates who want everything done for them?
One possible reason: Grand fortune encourages the rich to see in others the approach to life that great wealth cultivates in them. No one gets more "done for them" than the super rich.
Who else but the rich can hire chauffeurs to drive their cars and nannies to raise their children, maids to clean their houses and personal trainers to tone their bodies, chefs to cook their meals and captains to steer their yachts, personal assistants to do their shopping and PR flacks to sing their praises?
Now Americans of more modest affluence can also partake of some of these services. But only the truly rich have the resources to get virtually "everything done" by others, day after day, year after year.
Life in this entitlement environment shapes how the awesomely affluent interact with the world. They come to see their privilege as the proper order of the universe. The wealthy deserve to be served. Those without wealth do not. If those without wealth did rate as deserving, after all, wouldn't they already be wealthy?
Social scientists have a label that may be useful here. They speak about "projection," the phenomenon of projecting onto others what leaves us ashamed in ourselves.
Deep down, the wealthy who have "everything done for them" must at some level feel the artificiality -- and inhumanity -- of their privilege. We individual humans, as social animals, simply cannot perpetually take without giving. Rather than confront this inhumanity, the rich ascribe it to others.
Meanwhile, the suffering -- in Puerto Rico and everywhere else people suffer to survive -- continues.
Would some really good therapy turn all this around? Could some ace therapists help the Donald Trumps and Mitt Romneys see the error of their insensitive ways? Most probably not. Grand concentrations of private wealth make the poisons of privilege inevitable. The longer we let these grand concentrations fester, the more poison they produce.
These poisons have only one lasting antidote. Greater equality.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
Sam Pizzigati
Sam Pizzigati, veteran labor journalist and Institute for Policy Studies associate fellow, edits Inequality.org. His recent books include: The Case for a Maximum Wage (2018) and The Rich Don't Always Win: The Forgotten Triumph over Plutocracy that Created the American Middle Class, 1900-1970 (2012).
Only days after the horrific aftermath of Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico, Donald Trump unleashed a tweet that outraged many but surprised few. With millions of Puerto Ricans without minimal food, water, and fuel, Trump lashed out against those islanders literally begging for more federal help.
"They want," Trump snarled, "everything done for them."
How terribly insensitive, millions of us on the mainland muttered in response. But how predictably Trump, we all sighed. The Donald being Donald.
But we're making a mistake, a big mistake, when we react that way. Trump's graceless insensitivity doesn't just reflect Donald being Donald. His comments reflect Donald being rich. Super rich.
Remember Mitt Romney? In his 2012 campaign for the White House, the phenomenally rich Romney displayed the same basic mindset as the Donald, his successor as the GOP Presidential nominee. Some "47 percent" of Americans, Romney told a gathering of his big-time contributors, "believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it."
Romney's "welfare bum"-style comments came in a private, behind-closed-doors, no-press-allowed session, a setting where Mitt and his fellow rich could let their hair down and share what they really feel. But why do they feel that way? Why do the rich so often see those who lack the wealth they have in abundance as ingrates who want everything done for them?
One possible reason: Grand fortune encourages the rich to see in others the approach to life that great wealth cultivates in them. No one gets more "done for them" than the super rich.
Who else but the rich can hire chauffeurs to drive their cars and nannies to raise their children, maids to clean their houses and personal trainers to tone their bodies, chefs to cook their meals and captains to steer their yachts, personal assistants to do their shopping and PR flacks to sing their praises?
Now Americans of more modest affluence can also partake of some of these services. But only the truly rich have the resources to get virtually "everything done" by others, day after day, year after year.
Life in this entitlement environment shapes how the awesomely affluent interact with the world. They come to see their privilege as the proper order of the universe. The wealthy deserve to be served. Those without wealth do not. If those without wealth did rate as deserving, after all, wouldn't they already be wealthy?
Social scientists have a label that may be useful here. They speak about "projection," the phenomenon of projecting onto others what leaves us ashamed in ourselves.
Deep down, the wealthy who have "everything done for them" must at some level feel the artificiality -- and inhumanity -- of their privilege. We individual humans, as social animals, simply cannot perpetually take without giving. Rather than confront this inhumanity, the rich ascribe it to others.
Meanwhile, the suffering -- in Puerto Rico and everywhere else people suffer to survive -- continues.
Would some really good therapy turn all this around? Could some ace therapists help the Donald Trumps and Mitt Romneys see the error of their insensitive ways? Most probably not. Grand concentrations of private wealth make the poisons of privilege inevitable. The longer we let these grand concentrations fester, the more poison they produce.
These poisons have only one lasting antidote. Greater equality.
Sam Pizzigati
Sam Pizzigati, veteran labor journalist and Institute for Policy Studies associate fellow, edits Inequality.org. His recent books include: The Case for a Maximum Wage (2018) and The Rich Don't Always Win: The Forgotten Triumph over Plutocracy that Created the American Middle Class, 1900-1970 (2012).
Only days after the horrific aftermath of Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico, Donald Trump unleashed a tweet that outraged many but surprised few. With millions of Puerto Ricans without minimal food, water, and fuel, Trump lashed out against those islanders literally begging for more federal help.
"They want," Trump snarled, "everything done for them."
How terribly insensitive, millions of us on the mainland muttered in response. But how predictably Trump, we all sighed. The Donald being Donald.
But we're making a mistake, a big mistake, when we react that way. Trump's graceless insensitivity doesn't just reflect Donald being Donald. His comments reflect Donald being rich. Super rich.
Remember Mitt Romney? In his 2012 campaign for the White House, the phenomenally rich Romney displayed the same basic mindset as the Donald, his successor as the GOP Presidential nominee. Some "47 percent" of Americans, Romney told a gathering of his big-time contributors, "believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it."
Romney's "welfare bum"-style comments came in a private, behind-closed-doors, no-press-allowed session, a setting where Mitt and his fellow rich could let their hair down and share what they really feel. But why do they feel that way? Why do the rich so often see those who lack the wealth they have in abundance as ingrates who want everything done for them?
One possible reason: Grand fortune encourages the rich to see in others the approach to life that great wealth cultivates in them. No one gets more "done for them" than the super rich.
Who else but the rich can hire chauffeurs to drive their cars and nannies to raise their children, maids to clean their houses and personal trainers to tone their bodies, chefs to cook their meals and captains to steer their yachts, personal assistants to do their shopping and PR flacks to sing their praises?
Now Americans of more modest affluence can also partake of some of these services. But only the truly rich have the resources to get virtually "everything done" by others, day after day, year after year.
Life in this entitlement environment shapes how the awesomely affluent interact with the world. They come to see their privilege as the proper order of the universe. The wealthy deserve to be served. Those without wealth do not. If those without wealth did rate as deserving, after all, wouldn't they already be wealthy?
Social scientists have a label that may be useful here. They speak about "projection," the phenomenon of projecting onto others what leaves us ashamed in ourselves.
Deep down, the wealthy who have "everything done for them" must at some level feel the artificiality -- and inhumanity -- of their privilege. We individual humans, as social animals, simply cannot perpetually take without giving. Rather than confront this inhumanity, the rich ascribe it to others.
Meanwhile, the suffering -- in Puerto Rico and everywhere else people suffer to survive -- continues.
Would some really good therapy turn all this around? Could some ace therapists help the Donald Trumps and Mitt Romneys see the error of their insensitive ways? Most probably not. Grand concentrations of private wealth make the poisons of privilege inevitable. The longer we let these grand concentrations fester, the more poison they produce.
These poisons have only one lasting antidote. Greater equality.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.