The banks weren’t set up to serve the people, they were set up to serve the banks. The people serve the banks in a banking system.
The country with the most might is the most powerful country, untouchable unswayable impenetrable. The most might is ensured by the most money. The biggest army needs the biggest economy, and then they begin to support each other, the army and the economy.
The system is not designed to be anything other then a cyclical support system for this industry, a monetary system whose biggest investor is the military industry: more money means more war means more money. This system is not designed to improve the lives of the poor, or to eradicate poverty. That would ultimately spell the end of the system. It would be suicidal for the system to take away the need for anyone to accumulate capital, as the system needs that motion of money to maintain its cycle. Eradicating monetary poverty would have to mean establishing a system that didn’t cycle around monetary wealth.
When a poor man wants to succeed he thinks about becoming rich, accumulating wealth, capital gain, each step of which involves investment in the banking system, a system that is set up and maintained by the banks. The banks control capital on behalf of themselves and the rich minority, together forming the upper tiers of the system. So each move by a poor man to become a rich man ultimately further enriches those in control of that investment, in control of the capital. The move that the poor man makes is ultimately made to benefit the banks. The gap between rich and poor is maintained by the poor investing in becoming rich.
If the poor could break out of the monetary system, in which they exist as poor, and establish a system of sustained survival that was not dependant on accumulating money, then they would fall out of the category of “poor” and break free from its associations i.e. the self-inhibiting and disempowering feeling of worthlessness. Worthlessness is related to definitions of worth and in a monetary system that worth is defined by material aquisition of items deemed valuable by the same system. “Valuable” again is defined by value and value, outside of a monetary system, is an arbitrary concept, or at least a concept that can be personally defined.
If our ideas of worth and value, of success and failure, can be re-examined and recreated so that they don’t imply money or material gain, then we will have taken a
crucial and concrete step towards eventual emancipation from this system of capitalist consumer control.
I’m willing to work on it, utopian as it might seem, coz if there’s one thing the majority of us agree on, it’s that a better world is possible.