undefined | Better HN

0 pointsindigo9452y ago0 comments

Yes, the examples correlate with affluence, which is a necessary condition for them to be included in this article; but it is obviously not a sufficient condition, as all "luxury beliefs" from elsewhere on the political spectrum are excluded.

My point is that this is a bad faith argument. The author pretends to care about "luxury" beliefs, but in truth, all he cares about is finding a cheap shot against feminist positions. He intends to delegitimize these positions by painting them as an upper-class fringe ("luxury") concern. Once this angle of attack is found, the author never stops to see that the same attack could be levied against any number of political positions that he himself might agree with, because he was never interested in a real debate to begin with: he only wants to smear and ridicule.

The point is not that the examples are also "correlated" with something else, it's that they're carefully cherry-picked and made a target for an attack that would work against conservative positions, carefully excluded by the author, just as nicely as it does against liberal positions here.

0 comments

8 comments · 1 top-level

peyton2y ago· 7 in thread

I dunno, I read it apolitically. Normal working-class people don’t give a shit about any of this stuff, and as soon as they do, it’ll become unfashionable, and we’ll move on to the next thing.

sangnoir2y ago

> dunno, I read it apolitically. Normal working-class people don’t give a shit about any of this stuff

The fiercest culture warriors I know are working-class folk. They do in fact, give a shit about this stuff, no matter where they fall on the political spectrum. I blame the increased polarization.

The irony is that people who claim to be against culture wars - like the author - are they themselves actively engaging in a culture war while feigning neutrality. The truth is that they are simply against one perspective, which betrays either a lack of self-awareness, or bad faith.

elmomle2y ago

I think once the idea of heteronormativity had percolated through all of society as a well understood concept, it would no longer be as pressing a concern. These concepts tend to be in vogue specifically because they are salient.

It is intellectually dangerous to read a piece like this "apolitically", precisely because a biased political agenda is wearing the garb of a much more universal observation. If the writer had mixed "luxury beliefs" from all over the political spectrum, then there would be a clear focus on what the title purports to concern. Instead, there is a second agenda that is being silently conflated without being acknowledged.

notfromhere2y ago

White working class people don’t, others definitely do. You can’t just generalize like that.

Working class people aren’t even inherently apolitical, they just don’t vote and aren’t taught that voting changes things like middle and upper class folks are

Mezzie2y ago

It's true that white working class people are the most likely to non engage politically for a variety of reasons, but it's also generalizing to say that working class PoC inherently care or adopt the same political ideas as the professional classes. Even among Black Southerners (who are very politically organized), whether someone agrees with modern social justice/intersectional frameworks is going to depend highly on other factors such as age and level of religiosity.

isleyaardvark2y ago

Neither do the rich.

It’s wild that this whole piece is based on one response on one question in a poll.

The income bracket breakdown on that question is 22%/23%/32%. Which is significant but isn’t “they’re all top hat wearing elites just trying to impress each other”. “Defund the police” isn’t even the majority opinion of that income bracket.

This whole article is just an attempt to smear liberals. Even if you care about making the case that defund the police is a “luxury” to advance their social standing, then simply pointing to a slightly higher level of support in a higher income bracket is quite frankly stupid.

(As an aside, I don’t think they get the history of dueling right, either.)

NotHowStatsWork2y ago

It becomes even more obvious when you look at the rest of the chart.

While the income breakdown is 22%/23%/32%, the urban breakdown is 30%/25%/28%/12%. With the largest difference between City and Rural.

This is not commented on by the author, as it would undercut their implicit point.

littlestymaar2y ago

> I dunno, I read it apolitically

Then you've been duped by the author faking a neutral tone. This post is definitely not apolitical.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse