• plinky [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    24 days ago

    Nah, he is on severe grind about elites, kinda toozy vibes, but from “this is our aristocracy, when they fail to renew, we don’t ball”

    • MizuTama [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      24 days ago

      I mean, reading how he defines elites, it almost seems like he is trying to recreate the definition of labor aristocrats.

      (shitpost below) A bunch of laborers given bits of capitalist plunder in order to siphon off revolutionary inclinations? Sounds a tad familiar. We’re gonna have the US revolutionary body call themselves Turchinists.

      • plinky [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        24 days ago

        To me it seems like anarcho-influenced interpretation (e.g. progression of hierarchy->aristocracy->porkies (+their house servants, so like top decile), only observing that not material reality changed, but the top becomes unsupported/overproduced and tips over). Only don’t think i’ve seen other traces of anarchist thought in him, so vivian-shrug

        • MizuTama [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          24 days ago

          I was gonna make a pithy joke about expecting ideological consistency from a neolib at first But to me, it seems to be that dude is trying to rediscover dialectics within neoliberalism as a framework and force it together with whatever ideological components may serve as an explanation. It’s a marriage of convenient ideas as he has seen something at play. I am still behind on theory though and this is the only article I’ve seen from him so I could be wrong.