• ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    He’d probably would have wrote a chapter about how the weirdness of the ploretariat are persecuted as “degeneracy”, but is celebrated as “quirkiness” when they’re of the bourgeoisie. (Would not be surprised it he already did)

    • Adm_Drummer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Does he not speak of how organised and collectivist Bourgeois/Capitalists are seen as productive and good (because they’re rich) yet an organised and collectivist proletariat is unproductive and bad (because it makes the rich less rich). It’s fine for the rich to gather wealth and help eachother get rich but it’s not okay for the common person to help those around them rise to equal footing.

      Where organised and collectivist = Quirky and Free-spirited;

      Productive = Cool;

      Good = Fun;

      Unproductive = Uncool;

      Bad = Unfun.

      Modern society labels personality quirks and non-conformity as Cool and Fun when the person displaying those traits has money and status.

      But have a poor person display the same and they’re weird, or odd, creepy or sad. Otherwise Uncool and Unfun.

      Author’s note: I spent way to long typical out this shitpost.