That sounds rather unlike Madison. Where, specifically, did he say that?
> Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The senate, therefore, ought to be this body.
This quote comes from a statement Madison made at the Federal Convention of 1787 (https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-004...), and is basically pointing out that a Democracy is susceptible to a Tyranny of the Majority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority), and needs a balancing force (the Senate). The comment you are replying to is from a user named "chmsky00" which gives a hint about how some, in particular Noam Chomsky, have interpreted this quote by Noam Chomsky (https://chomsky.info/commongood02/).
Trade to support biological life is one thing, and is something I feel should be unencumbered by servicing memes like “Jeff Bezos is worth billions of dollars.” An idea my math education informs me is built on abstraction the public cannot understand. It’s little different than conquering indigenous people with language like “My God commands it!”
Bezos isn’t a savior or genius; he had help from our social field theory in the form of rich relatives and friends who gained in a higher tax era, then changes the rules.
Paulo Freire and countless others offer similar metaphors for applying economics to social behavior. We call it behavioral economics now.
IMO the public should be holding out at scale, and only enabling the building of long lived solutions rather than lowest bidder public works, and social agency bent towards consumer waste creation and cleanup, while letting a minority LARP being above the daily work that enables their life.
Simple.
Aristocratic protectionism is built into the American political system.
https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/8793/what-did-j...