Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Interesting, but (without having read the book) I get the feeling this can become a bit of a gadget. Take this from Salon for example:

[The] pope is a member of the superclass, as is Osama bin Laden, who can undoubtedly claim influence over current international affairs, even if he sometimes lives in a cave. The Russian illegal arms dealer Viktor "Merchant of Death" Bout is a member, as are Rupert Murdoch and Bill Clinton...

Yeah, well... This could be said of powerful people at any time in history. Is it enough to draw up a list and call them a superclass? I'd actually be more interested in analysis of the money, the control over economic globalisation, and how economic globalisation fills their pockets and gives them specifically different or new powers. But perhaps that's in the book...

(PS Viktor Bout was arrested last week.)

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Fri Mar 14th, 2008 at 05:29:56 AM EST
The concern is that that the wealth and power concentration reached "unhealthy" levels - say, not necessarily unprecedented, but not of normally sustainable level. If you compare with the situation with few decades ago (before Reagan, Friedman, etc), workers were getting better salaries, living better and more secure lives, while now they can't "aford" that. You have a class of priveleged deciders, and the rest must follow a pretty slavery routine. There is some risk of totalitarian control by some 6 or 60 of those 6000.

Aomw thoughts of mine in that direction are here, here and here.

by das monde on Sat Mar 15th, 2008 at 06:15:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series