Max Castle

but I hardly think the bioleninism model (in the original post) deals much with genetics or its relation to society. it's mostly about a variant of a political strategy.

imo the political strategy laid out in the post - the rerouting of cultural Marxist conspiracy theories through Gramsci - is an extremely suspect analysis, and misses the actual nature of the transformation in the post-Fordist era..

It's not a capture of governance by leftist apparatchik - it's the shifting modes of production itself, understood as an apparatus of capture that hijacks so-called dissident pathways and recodes them as governing protocols and commodities.

Something like D&G's axiomatic model of capitalism, where it can add and subtract elements in relation to the libidinal economy, it probably more accurate that anything resembling a Leninist maneuver (memeplexed or otherwise).

yeah, I think it's definitely not paying attention to a lot of stuff happening around it that made it possible. but the central scheme (commitment derived from lack of status) seems neat, at least from the POV of party politics.

What is gained by moving the idea from power to status (other than a psychologizing that clouds the issue)?

Maybe a channeling of forces into a framework equitable to the system, as opposed to letting forces run gambit that might destabilize the system. But that framework - capture entangled with shock absorption - drifts further from the Bioleninist model..

which seems to suggest that marginalized groups were passive prior to 'left agitation'... which is patently untrue, at least in the United States.