1,811 karma · joined September 1, 2014
Completely relinquishing the ability to judge things on their actual context in favor of the unthinking punitive application of absolutist principles is the beating heart of every anti-human ideology.
This is not to say the monks didn't work or didn't follow ascetic regimens, but they weren't doing all the work of keeping the monastery running.
https://www.amazon.com/Oligarchy-Jeffrey-Winters/dp/05211829...
This would only be true if everyone owned their own residences and profited from the increase in land values. In reality, the inhabitants of gentrifying neighborhoods are usually just evicted from their homes so the owners can sell to developers, and they end up worse off than they were before.
These priorities are relatively easy to see when it comes to techno-weirdos like Tim Draper and Peter Thiel or cartoonish megalomaniacs like Bezos, but they govern the behavior of even otherwise staid and conventional oligarchs (see, for instance, Eric Schmidt strong-arming the New America Foundation to fire everyone involved in antitrust policy research).
Yes, again, that's the point. The entire paradigm exists to justify the unjust concentration of power and wealth in a small upper class. It doesn't require an active conspiracy, it just requires people to accept that there is something objectively 'right' or naturally ordained about this state of affairs, as you apparently do.
Note especially the conflation of 'minorities' with 'poor people'; this lets those members of the bourgeois who miss out on their exact institution of choice (and might have to attend UC Santa Cruz instead of Stanford, the horror) reconcile their own sense of self-worth with the class myth that failure to get admission to college denotes inferiority: they did meet all the fair, objective, meritocratic criteria, but the university gave their rightful slot to an undeserving black / hispanic person instead.
Of course, most bourgeois aggressively refuse to accept the idea that there is anything political about their consumption choices at all, or that they even have 'class enemies', because they refuse to acknowledge that they occupy and actively maintain a privileged position in a fundamentally unjust and exploitative system.
What hypothesizes might you suggest?