The losers everywhere have been the *protected* mediocrities with cultural-majority affiliations everywhere, who had gotten complacent in their sense of institutionally validated (and undeservedly rewarded) sense of being "better" as a member of a "state-chosen" people.
-
Show this thread
-
So the idea that "when you're used to privilege, equality feels like oppression", read it as "institutionally advantaged looting/spoils privileges", not lip-service narrative spotlight. For "equality" read "equality of looting/expropriation opportunity" not institutional access.
1 reply 2 retweets 9 likesShow this thread -
If you think about it, in a grand narrative sense, the pissed off seething-ressentiment ethnomajoritarian masses were never forgotten. They had continuous claim on being "real" Americans. It just got hollowed out, with real rewards being deregulated for democratic looting.
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
This ~40 year trajectory is why I'm ultimately not worried about the "SJW" bogeyperson (heh!) threat. They're merely trying to recode old, shrinking spoils system in their favor. What good is control of universities or academic publishing if action has left the building?
1 reply 1 retweet 9 likesShow this thread -
Public funding for "impersonal" institutions everywhere is shrinking, and being replaced with equivalent neoliberal equal-opportunity expropriation institution. SJWs are fighting over shrinking old pie. Ethnonationalists are mad about not getting first slice of growing new pie.
1 reply 2 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
SJWs are fighting over the dead carcass of the old world. The amount of damage they can do is fundamentally limited. The ethnonationalist right though, is threatening the living, growing thing. The amount of damage they can do is basically infinite. They might kill golden goose.
1 reply 6 retweets 13 likesShow this thread -
Can we do better than neoliberalism? Yeah, sure, We can and we must, since big new challenges like climate change seem out of reach for its institutions (it is *powered* by tragedy of the commons in the worst case). More critically, it is based on nation states.
2 replies 4 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @vgr
Are you looking beyond the nation-state here? I'm not sure if Kennedy's "market-state" theory ever played out in practice
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @craig_montuori
Yes, that's the only place I'm looking :D Nation-states are not dying, but they are going to be something of a vestigial layer of the stack that's going to float up for ceremonial use, with more consequential layers like MNCs sinking below to be new bedrock.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr @craig_montuori
Corporate power has been reined in before. I think people are more comfortable with a nationalist power they can control than a corporate power they can’t. And when corporate power feels too dominant, government tends to step in (see: Trustbusting)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Dangerous belief in history rhyming exactly. This ain't Standard Oil.
-
-
Replying to @vgr @craig_montuori
From the standpoint of the conduct of the corporations or from the political distrust in corporate power? Just cause Google and Amazon are better doesn’t mean people will be any more comfortable with it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chrisFnicholson @vgr
Neither to me. The corporations are much more transnational, less constrained by national power these days. Corporate inversions as an example
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.