Right. I know.
Not evil for me you tell yourself, only for everyone else. Maybe.
But no — no maybe. It's not a maybe thing.
Wealth is evil.
Before the development of agriculture people had wars, but they were mostly symbolic, more like football. People did a little posturing, some hooting and insult-tossing, got it out of their systems, and went home to catch the latest on TV.
There was no ownership of land because, well, people had to keep moving and couldn't own things like land.
But after agriculture got a good start, there were surpluses.
Culture exploded. Land became something to own. Slavery and a lot of other things came into being, because people lived lives in fixed places and could afford to buy and sell anything, including one another.
Monogamy became both relevant and important when people had valuables worth acquiring and worth keeping, and gained the idea of passing on wealth.
Now we have entire armies composed of mercenaries, whole industries devoted to counting out wealth, socking it away, and defending it.
The wealthiest 1% of Americans have as much income as the poorest 50% of Americans, and own as much, in dollar terms, as the poorest 90% of Americans.
That's you and me, Bub.
I'm willing to work for things but the game changes when no matter how much you work it ceases to matter because nothing will change.
I don't know what you call it.
I call it evil.
Have anything worth adding? Then try sosayseff@gmail.com
Me? Only slightly evil.
Etc...
so says eff: sporadic spurts of grade eff distraction
definitions: outdoor terms
fiyh: dave's little guide to ultralight backpacking stoves
boyb: dave's little guide to backpacks
snorpy bits: nibbling away at your sanity
last seen receding: missives from a certain mobile homer
noseyjoe: purposefully poking my proboscis into technicals