Is industrious labour inferior?

I was taking a look at Forbes list of billionaires for the first time. I was really surprised that only five from the top twenty billionaires of the world are involved in manufacturing. From the other fifteen, nine owe their riches to retail, two to software, one to investments, one to steel, one to media and one to telecommunications. My surprise skyrocketed when curiosity took me deeper into the success story behind each and every one of the list and I realised most of their riches are due to speculation and trading, not to say that some just inherited. Suddenly, Veblen words where flashing in my mind [T. Veblen "The Theory of the Leisure Class" 1899, chapter three "Conspicuous Leisure"]

"For this class (the superior pecuniary class) the incentive to diligence and thrift is not absent; but its action is so greatly qualified by the secondary demands of pecuniary emulation, that any inclination in this direction is practically overborne and any incentive to diligence tends to be of no effect. The most imperative of these secondary demands of emulation, as well as the one of widest scope, is the requirement of abstention from productive work. This is true in an especial degree for the barbarian stage of culture. During the predatory culture labour comes to be associated in men's habits of thought with weakness and subjection to a master. It is therefore a mark of inferiority, and therefore comes to be accounted unworthy of man in his best estate. By virtue of this tradition labour is felt to be debasing, and this tradition has never died out. On the contrary, with the advance of social differentiation it has acquired the axiomatic force due to ancient and unquestioned prescription"

Or even worse, is productive work a curse?

Productive work puts a roof over our heads, food at the supermarket aisles, clothes at the department stores and cars at the dealers yet it is heavily underpaid and suffers from continuous exploitation [see for example "The Island of Happiness", Human Rights Watch, May 19,2009 or the different cases at "The World Report 2009"] . The last time I checked the curse was on the land not the men [Genesis 3, 17-19].

"(17) To the man he said: 'Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree of which I had forbidden you to eat. Cursed be the ground because of you! In toil shall you eat its yield all the days of your life.

(18) Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to you, as you eat of the plants of the field.

(19) By the sweat of your face shall you get bread to eat, Until you return to the ground, from which you were taken; For you are dirt, and to dirt you shall return.' "

Surely not the first nor the second question are to have a positive answer from any of us, then why it seems the other way? There's no one else to blame but us.

What about responsibilities?

I find it impossible to leave this question behind. Every now and then I hear complains related to violation of some kind of rights: human, children, work, etc. I cannot be more supportive when these complains concern issues about torture, abuse, privation and the like. When they appear to be mere rants arising from the termination of graces, I cannot help thinking about responsibilities.

Does a right come with a responsibility?

The first thing that comes to my mind is the famous quote refering to the attitude of Voltaire, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." [Evelyn Beatrice Hall, "The Friends of Voltaire" p. 199 (1906)] It seems to me that every right comes with responsibility of protecting and providing it for everyone else without any condition.

I'm aware that a formal discussion on the topic should include a broad topic spectrum. Of course paradoxes will emerge when rights seem to compete, e.g. the right to life for the unborn and the freedom of choice for women. Then a most intriguing question emerges,

What is ultimately a fundamental right?

It is beyond my abilities such an analysis, thus let me say goodbye for today sharing two things.

Today, thanks to my brother RoFlo, I was looking at a caricature by Chanu [Ouest France, April 22nd 2009.] at the blog entrance "The perverse destruction of the school in two images, a design by Chaunu" ["La destruction perverse de l'École en deux images un dessin de Chaunu dans Ouest-France"], which provides a good reflection and analysis under the French perspective.
I dare to say that this analysis applies as well under the Mexican perspective.

Does the right to a good education comes with the responsibility to study and to respect our teachers? I think so [AMIT, originally from Save the Children Canada]

Now, I flee; it is past midnight in this half of the world. Good night!