When the ancient Greeks invented democracy there was a small elite wealthy class, and lots of average poor people. The wealthy also served as the ruling class, for the obvious reasons: they had money, owned the land, the businesses and had rich friends. The belief was that the wealthy would never be able to enslave or subjugate the poor because there are so many poor that they would easily out vote the wealthy. A beautiful theory when written down on paper.
There is a satirical saying ‘that if you put more than three people in a room, they will not be able to agree on anything’. This is truthful, the more people you gather together, the harder it is to get them to agree on anything. 1% is a drastically smaller number of people than 99%, it is very easy for them to come to a consensus, especially when it is in their best overall interests. It is very difficult for the 99% to come to a consensus about what is in their best interest. It is much easier to get people to agree on a common enemy, than a common cause. The 1% have concocted a number of common enemies for us to fear and insist that blindly trusting and obeying them, is the only way to stay safe.
It is not a good idea to organize into groups with leaders and central control. The 1% will attack, discredit, interfere, trash talk any such group or leader. The discussion would then be about the trash talk and no longer have anything to do with the issues the people are asking to be addressed. Each individual needs to act independently in accordance with their own beliefs and conscience. The “Yellow Vests” have employed this very effectively. If enough people act independently toward a common goal its effects will be felt and noticed. Then the people will be in a position to demand change. We must first demonstrate that we have power, flex our muscles, so to speak, then present our demands.
It is difficult for people to stand up for something on their own. Even if a million others may believe the same, they will all wait for one to stand up and see what outcome is, before they join. In today’s environment, anyone who opposes the 1% is ostracized, vilified and marginalized, instantly. The 1% control the media, the internet, the search engines, the corporations, the politicians and the money. They are in charge, they make and control the rules. The 1% act in their own best interest and this is normal human behavior. If we are rational, we do not act against our own best interest. They are not really doing anything wrong. We, the average person, are not standing up to act in our own best interest.
If you want better wages, affordable housing, better standard of living for the working class, health care, unbiased media, a strong prosperous middle class, you will have to stand up and demand it. It is not in the best interest of the 1% to provide this for the average person. They are not going to do it for us. Why would they? There is nothing in it for them.
We cannot do it by traditional methods. The 1% know these tactics. The have defenses prepared. They do need specific targets, without them, they are impotent. We need to demonstrate our power without giving them any specific targets. They have no defense for this circumstance.
Specifics
We cannot take them all on at once, they are too big, powerful, they make the rules, they run the game. They would force us to comply, by claiming economic or stability crisis, then using coercion and penalties. We can take them on, one or two at a time, without suffering repercussions. We are not supposed to suffer difficulty or inconvenience. We can decide not do business with any particular business we chose and there would be no economic or stability crisis. Like with any group of bullies, if you can take out the biggest and baddest one, you become their new leader.
Pick the largest corporation in your region or country or continent and refuse to do business with them. Do not buy products or services provided by them or any of their subsidiaries. This does not mean go without. All these products and services will be available from their competition. Selective purchasing.
Pick the largest private bank in your region or country or continent and refuse to do your banking there. Move your banking to a credit union or public bank, if available, if not, go to another bank, just not the largest one.
It may take a long time but if it is working then the hardship will begin to show. These are public corporations, they must provide timely financial information, by law. When the hardship to the corporation becomes evident then add the second biggest corporation to the sanction list. Only after this stage has begun are the demands of the people presented. As demands, not requests.
Individuals need to take these actions independently, not because you are told to do it or are part of a group or your neighbors are doing it, it is a private statement. You do not have to tell anyone what action you are taking. It is not a good idea to tell others what they should do or encourage them to do something. This will make you a target. Instead tell people what you have decided to do. Those who think it is a good idea, do the same. Join those actions which seem the most popular and make them more popular. The more people, the greater the effect.
Most of the liquid capital (cash, etc.) is in the hands of the working class. If someone is worth $80M it does not mean they have $80M in the bank. If they wanted $80M in cash, they would need to sell assets. Their capital power comes from being able to borrow large sums of money from banks. Collectively the working class has an immense amount of cash on hand. If we say that 10% of the people comprise the elite, that would be around 40M people in North America. If the other 360M all contributed $10 each, that would total $3.6 billion. That is only a one-time contribution, $10 per month would be over $40 billion a year. That is enough to buy our own media corporation and start publishing news to inform the people, not the stories the 1% want us to hear. We could collectively buy the 1% in a few years.