Marx married into minor mobility and was himself descended from prosperous Jews. Lenin's father was ennobled. Aristocrats turning against capitalism is as old as communism.
YV was born into a monied family and married into one. He also went to private school as a child. As far as I know he has spent most of his life in an ivory tower.
The WEF includes the top 100 companies in the world, along with the leaders and opposition leaders of every country. He's part of it.
You just keep pounding on the fact that he is from privilege, but that alone is not enough to be suspicious.
At the very best, you are arguing guilt by association.
They say you can know someone by the company they keep. The company he keeps are the Cambridge University students (who come disproportionately from private schools), mainstream media pundits and the billionaires of the WEF.
He doesn't just come from privilege... He never really left it.
Some people have claimed that this is what he is doing. You have provided zero evidence that it is not. You merely keep repeating the same statements about his origins and his affiliation with the WEF.
I am not saying you are wrong. I am saying you have not supported your position in any meaningful way.
What are his words? What are his actions?
Where is the harm?
Where is the evidence?
> they claim to want to liberate the working class when they were never part of it
that is not irony.
Do you believe only working class people can improve the situation for working class people? That seems counter-intuitive to me, as people outside the working class usually have more time and education to think about changes and advocate for them.
What was it the Who once sang, "meet the new boss, same as the old boss"? I don't think he has ever been much out of privileged circles.
The way ordinary people's lives can improve is self-advocacy and self-determination. You're not going to find that from Cambridge University where he teaches (one of the snobbiest and class ridden institutions in the UK which often resembles Hogwarts more than a modern university), the World Economic Forum (which prefers closed meetings to public ones and is furtive about its aims), or anything like that.
In this article he is right to voice concern about Big Tech oligarchy. But his analysis is off and he is not aware of what it really means to millions of people.