Bourgeoisie-created institutions

Completed a project for my "Social Thoughts and Theories" module by working on the topic of "The fallacy of the middle class". I was inspired to return to this pet topic of mine when my lecturer himself set this question in our tutorial homework: "Singapore is sometimes known as a middle class country. Marx says that there is no middle class. How do you reconcile the two?"

I agree that there is no middle class in Singapore as in my article "Bourgeoisie and Proletariat" dated 11th October 2007. As an elaboration, I illustrate using two examples which my lecturer brought up to challenge Marx (this is not to suggest whether my lecturer agrees or disagrees with Marx):

1. Presence of the appointments of CEO and Senior Management:
He clearly has a remuneration package that well exceeds the average worker and has only labour to offer. That makes him half Bourgeoisie and half Proletariat.

2. Presence of citizens in possession of 5Cs:
- Cash
- Condominium
- Car
- Country Club
- Credit Card

Hence, it is argued that yes, Middle class does exist. Briefly, to determine if there is a case for the middle class in these two examples, let us assess if resources are flowing into or out of the individual.

In the CEO & Management example, the exact nature of this remuneration package is seldom known to the average public. It is not all just cash, but rather a combination of cash and the company's assets. They are Bourgeoisie as they are part owners of companies. Further, is it possible that they know nothing about investments**?

In the 5Cs example, of the five, already three of them requires individuals to take up loans to upkeep which are potentially disastrous to them, financially. Result is a net outflow of resources. Proletariat.

An executive or engineer who earns $2000 is middle class. A doctor and a lawyer who earns much more can also be known as middle class. Either way, it is possible for individuals in both categories to fall into the loans trap. Hence, the phrase "Middle Class" makes no sense economically. At best, it can be interpreted only as a political tool of appeasement by way of its supposed prestige, if any, to prevent the uprising by the so-called "Middle class". Therefore we quickly end this part of tonight's discussion here and move on into the next, which is the more important.

It was a revelation when I could finally put an issue into words, ie the presence of financial institutions such as the stock market and banks in our society and why people get into trouble with them. The reason is simple. There is a complete mis-interpretation by these people, of the uses of these Bourgeoisie-created institutions.

Since the industrial age, when factories were built in cities and workers concentrated in them, money was created to compensate them. 80/20 (eighty-twenty) rule. What was created by the minority, ie money, had such power to the extent that the majority were sucked into their game. Bourgeoisie accumulate wealth and hence accumulated money. This simple system of wealth accumulation then evolved to what we know today as banks, the stock market and other financial insitutions.

Simply put, these financial institutions are Bourgeoisie-created institutions to which there is only one end: Wealth Accumulation. Hence, the only way to interprete these institutions is through the eyes of the Bourgeoisie.

Yet, there is a perversion in the use of these institutions by:

1. not fully understanding the essence of its uses (one can have in-depth knowledge of all the financial instruments in the world and still not understand the essence of their uses, ie I repeat, Wealth Accumulation)

2. or worse, adding ingredients of "thrill" into the equation in the case of stock markets, and "consumerism", "materialism" in the case of banks

While Bourgeoisie invests in the stock market with a focus on being assets and capital owners, the Proletariat "invests" in the stock market for the capital gains itself with no clear focus. While Bourgeoisie borrow from banks to set up business and other institutions of wealth accumulation, the Proletariat borrows for consumption and materialism which does not help in wealth accumulation.

Therefore, my dear readers, be a Bourgeoisie because you can. Please read my article "Bourgeoisie and Proletariat" again. Financial institutions are created and evolved by the elites, therefore understand these institutions from only the elites' perspectives. There is no other way. I round off with an admittedly bad analogy but the best that I can think of at this time of the night. Drive your car with a focus of taking you from place to place, and not drive it for the thrill of speed and egotism.

**I reiterate that It is important to note that acquiring assets for strategic long term purposes and speculation are two different things. The latter is gambling. The former is what should be done, ie through discipline, system and consistency.