So what you are saying, in plenty of words, is that because the dude has the material privileges he thinks that the world has the same access to them too?
Not quite. That’s one part of it, but not necessarily.
People hold ideas based on the physical reality they experience. People who grow up in wealthy environments are more accepting of worldviews that either justify or rationalize this, ie the myth of “meritocracy.” They can believe that others do not enjoy the same access, but can believe that hard work can get anyone where they are, as an example.
This has further implications. Fascism, for example, isn’t spread because it’s an “appealing idea,” but as a response to decay of Capitalism, typically. Anlyzing the mechanics of why certain types of ideas become broadly accepted based on change in material reality is useful for preventing dangerous ideas as well.
I wish we could make a population with even the basic reading comprehension to understand these facts and then people might start taking advantage of our most powerful tool, democratic voting, to make real changes to how wealth is distributed.
But to this day when you suggest such a thing, people will default to images in their mind of everyone being forced to wear grey jumpsuits and stand in line for hours for a potato. We have the technological and productive means now to socialize many elements of our lives that would give everyone access to more resources and benefits and lower poverty and needless suffering, which helps everyone, even those already privileged.
But the capitalist narrative will push back on these ideas to its last, dying gasp, even as the world starts to burn and people lose everything, we will still see people arguing for “job creators” and how the wealthy are responsible for all our comforts, and that the socialist alternative will mean people will never own anything… as capitalism takes people’s ownership of everything.
I wish we could make a population with even the basic reading comprehension to understand these facts and then people might start taking advantage of our most powerful tool, democratic voting, to make real changes to how wealth is distributed.
That’s why Leftists abandoned electoralism a long, long time ago. The system is deliberately designed against significant change in Class society, ergo Leftist theory is centered around organization and building dual power.
But to this day when you suggest such a thing, people will default to images in their mind of everyone being forced to wear grey jumpsuits and stand in line for hours for a potato. We have the technological and productive means now to socialize many elements of our lives that would give everyone access to more resources and benefits and lower poverty and needless suffering, which helps everyone, even those already privileged.
People’s ideas are generally a product of their Material Conditions. Socialism may be correct, but people’s class-interests largely influence what ideas people accept.
But the capitalist narrative will push back on these ideas to its last, dying gasp, even as the world starts to burn and people lose everything, we will still see people arguing for “job creators” and how the wealthy are responsible for all our comforts, and that the socialist alternative will mean people will never own anything… as capitalism takes people’s ownership of everything.
There is a rising Leftist current as a response to Capitalism’s decay, what remains is organizing that response and building up dual power.
The concept of noblesse oblige really needs to be restored and expanded. Most of us have advantages we don’t understand. It’s why charity and compassion is so important.
Noblesse oblige is unnecessary if you work to eradicate Class society in the first place. Convincing Capitalists to work against the forces of Profit to be nicer people will never work, that’s why Utopian Socialists all failed.
So what you are saying, in plenty of words, is that because the dude has the material privileges he thinks that the world has the same access to them too?
Not quite. That’s one part of it, but not necessarily.
People hold ideas based on the physical reality they experience. People who grow up in wealthy environments are more accepting of worldviews that either justify or rationalize this, ie the myth of “meritocracy.” They can believe that others do not enjoy the same access, but can believe that hard work can get anyone where they are, as an example.
This has further implications. Fascism, for example, isn’t spread because it’s an “appealing idea,” but as a response to decay of Capitalism, typically. Anlyzing the mechanics of why certain types of ideas become broadly accepted based on change in material reality is useful for preventing dangerous ideas as well.
I wish we could make a population with even the basic reading comprehension to understand these facts and then people might start taking advantage of our most powerful tool, democratic voting, to make real changes to how wealth is distributed.
But to this day when you suggest such a thing, people will default to images in their mind of everyone being forced to wear grey jumpsuits and stand in line for hours for a potato. We have the technological and productive means now to socialize many elements of our lives that would give everyone access to more resources and benefits and lower poverty and needless suffering, which helps everyone, even those already privileged.
But the capitalist narrative will push back on these ideas to its last, dying gasp, even as the world starts to burn and people lose everything, we will still see people arguing for “job creators” and how the wealthy are responsible for all our comforts, and that the socialist alternative will mean people will never own anything… as capitalism takes people’s ownership of everything.
That’s why Leftists abandoned electoralism a long, long time ago. The system is deliberately designed against significant change in Class society, ergo Leftist theory is centered around organization and building dual power.
People’s ideas are generally a product of their Material Conditions. Socialism may be correct, but people’s class-interests largely influence what ideas people accept.
There is a rising Leftist current as a response to Capitalism’s decay, what remains is organizing that response and building up dual power.
The concept of noblesse oblige really needs to be restored and expanded. Most of us have advantages we don’t understand. It’s why charity and compassion is so important.
Noblesse oblige is unnecessary if you work to eradicate Class society in the first place. Convincing Capitalists to work against the forces of Profit to be nicer people will never work, that’s why Utopian Socialists all failed.
Eradicating class will never work, either.