Very sleek stuff, but reading the analysis gives bad vibes - what is their deal? Trot stuff? Can someone give me a good workup (I'm lazy)?
this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2024
56 points (98.3% liked)
chapotraphouse
13505 readers
967 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank
Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here
Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yeah! The vibe is so weird, I'll be looking at an elegant graph demonstrating income inequality and the next page is an article like that
It's academia brained "acceptable" socialist rhetoric. They are allowed to point out iniquities but when it comes to discussing What Is To Be Done
they limit themselves to liberal electoral politics and cannot offer anything revolutionary because when it comes down to it they are almost entirely wealthy intelligentsia afraid of risking their cushy ivory tower positions.
What's funny about this is that academics are cushy but they're not even close to the wealth and power of the bourgeoisie. Yet another case of a group of people captured by liberalism because they earn a bit more than everyone else.
Let alone Jacobin for a second:
You think getting one article placed in a magazine makes you wealthy intelligentsia? Lol how much do you think writers make?
Unless they are already independently famous as an author, or it's a mega publication, the author of most magazine articles you've read probably made somewhere between 2 and low-4 figures for weeks worth of work
yeah this is true. Jacobin might trend a bit wealthier than a similarly (small) sized general interest mag, and intelligentsia I would say applies to the majority of their writers regardless (as professors and think tank people,) even if though they probably aren't wealthy. Article writing itself is generally not lucrative, and honestly neither is most levels of academia.
It'd be convenient if they were just rich but I think they're mostly genuine libs. It is probably still true that they would risk their jobs by advocating revolutionary actions
I think there's also simply the problem that magazine editors today will not print "I would like to behead my landlord", and that magazine may not even be its own landlord to be able to print that. What makes it into published periodicals is not necessarily the most left thought the author or the editor has ever had.
Okay that's the bingo