Currently I'm reading one of JMG's latest books
Dark Age America. He talks about wealth and money, and he points out that money is not the norm in terms of our species time on Earth. However, the arrangement without money, from a western POV, seems to be feudalism.
Another idea that seems to work against money, I don't know too much about, and that is anarchy as a political movement. I've never read any books on the subject, but I suppose I will soon because I have been growing interested in it lately. Yet, it seems to me like just another idealistic movement that won't work simply because of it's composition of idealism. I've learned that too much idealism just equals delusions. There is maybe room for a smattering of idealism in daily life, but beyond that and you are setting yourself up for agitation, friction, and needless strife. I'm well qualified as I have spent my entire life wallowing in idealism. Even now, having identified this problem of mine, I still find it hard to ascend up out of the pit of idealism. Idealism works in the realm of spirituality, and that is it's proper place it seems to me.
JRM, this idea of yours is one of idealism. On the one hand we have the empires practice of Newspeek to deal with. They take over words all of the time and change their meanings, and they typically change them to their opposite meaning...which is what Newspeek is. Not just words, but ideas and institutions." "The Ministry of Health" being the place one would go to get tortured. "Freedom is Slavery" and the like. On the other hand, the idea of wealth is central to a corporeal existence, and it's defined as stuff and how much stuff you have, and what that stuff is.
Yet there is the usage of wealth such as "he has a wealth of knowledge." That means he has a lot of knowledge and knowledge is not a physical good. It just means there is a lot of knowledge in his possession. There is also spiritual wealth. There are different types of wealth. The common wealth, however, is money and and the things that money can buy.
In this case, you cannot claim Newspeek because everybody uses the term "wealth" to mean material abundance. The definition of the word has not been changed, you, JRM, are trying to change it, and so I agree with RE that you should just use another word. This is similar to the debate we had about the word "cult." Here on the Diner I believe the dictionary is judge and jury in these cases. We rely solely on words to communicate via this forum. The dictionary's purpose is to define words, and so we must acquiesce to those definitions. The meaning and usage of words is a very nuanced thing, but in this case it is even less so than with the word "cult."
There is a world of difference between the ideas of "wealth" and "value." "Quality" is another word that comes to mind.
You can't force spiritual ideas onto people. It just doesn't work that way. That's why the great spiritual practitioners simply point in the direction that leads to enlightenment. You have to go their yourself or it doesn't work. I'm of the opinion that real wealth comes from a spiritual place because in the end we all die and we can't take our "wealth" with us. Doesn't stop us from trying. The real wealth we are here for is an intangible wealth that is made of experience and knowledge. I believe when we die we can take that with us, if only to help navigate our way back to source.