i feel like there are two definitions of “rich” that get conflated, one of which is “has enough money to not worry every month about bills” and the other of which is “has actual economic power”

like im not gonna go on here and say “making 100k doesn’t make you rich” but also 100k today is equivalent to 28k in 1980 dollars and if you think people who made less than 30k in 1980 had the power to individually effect change i have a bridge in nebraska to sell you

like if you’re a worker who makes a lot of money for a worker you should absolutely give a lot of that away to workers who are forcibly impoverished by capitalism but that doesn’t mean you aren’t a worker and shouldn’t be working towards furthering the interests of the proletariat


the thing that makes me hesitant about “tech workers who make market rate aren’t workers” rhetoric is that MOST OF THOSE TECH WORKERS AGREE WITH THAT! they all think they’re temporarily-embarrassed bourgeoisie and so they work against the interests of the proletariat because they assume they’ll be bourgeois (i.e. “a founder”) someday so they should advance the interests of the bourgeois!

Sign in to participate in the conversation

monads.online is a place for friends