Life Obscene

[addy]

Nice to see you posting more stuff . Again, i'll keep the comments light.

This piece suffers from an inconsistent meter, so that's something you can work on (we have some pretty good resources on this site about poetic forms ). It has a pretty powerful core message, but it's expressed mainly in vague broadstrokes in between metaphors that are only loosely related to one another. There's no strong interrelatedness to the imagery, so for me the poem didn't particularly gel into a distinct and unified narrative. What i mean is each individual image you portray is distinct, but taken as a whole they mesh into something generic. Just my take

Hope some of this helps

A life lacking meaning, a societal thrall, This doesn't really grab my attention as well as a first line should... for me your second line makes for a better opening
the melancholy prince of nothing at all,
gazes into endless colours, blurring, losing, don't think "losing" is the right word
technology static but of his own choosing.

His riches are endless and flow like a flood,
beach palace is painted with innocent blood, I like the thread of flood, then beach, then blood, suggesting a tide of blood. In this instance the images complement one another and tie back nicely
they say he has earnt it, like he earned his fate,
that those at the top deserve all they create.

So small people in factories slave far away,
to engorge his capital the people must pay, i understand what you mean in this part... phrases like "small people" sound a little trite and weak. "Slave far away" is also strange for me because you reference a physical distance between the "prince" and the "people" but immediately drop that line of thought to talk about something else entirely
but we justify this for our secret delight,
we'll slip into his shoes as is our... don't think you need ellipsis right. I notice you say "we" in this stanza, but in S2 you said "they". Keep it consistent (I vote using "we" in the second stanza)

He tastes chemical flavour, gluttonous fool's feast,
devours all and thus becomes obesity's beast,
their children are violated with their greed,
illusions of pleasure, they planted that seed.

His elegant beauty turns to some why "some"?skeletal lust,
perfection or pain, her dreams fall to dust,
her starvation is radiant, as is her dread,
eyes so bright and fair, so hopelessly dead.

In false smiles they sip sweet poisons in vain,
shedding the agony of their descent to insane,
rotting to their core, they then deign to choke,
they do this themselves, on acrid clouds of smoke. So a new character is introduced, a kind of anorexic romantic partner to the gluttonous prince. It's interesting, but the way it's written takes the poem in a different direction from what was first established. You're talking about two different kinds of social schizophrenia now: the disjoint between the rich and the poor on one hand, and on the other hand how those with privilege are greedy yet still starving. Different subjects, in my opinion. You might be trying to take this one poem to too many places.

They are repulsive, their words convulse with hate,
they are depraved, alone, they no longer relate,
they have only regret, their world has lost shape,
they have created a hell with no end or escape. Whose "they" here? The prince and his skeletal wife, or the "they" of society? At some point I lost my reference point