I don't know that it's necessarily hypocritical to criticize a policy even if you benefit from it or similar policies. It's kind of the :very-intelligent: "yet you participate in society" but now we approve because it's directed at shitheads.
The key difference is that workers have the conditions of capitalism forced upon them, which makes their participation in the capitalist system (including purchase of consumer goods like iphones and Starbucks) less than entirely voluntary.
Prager U, on the other hand, constantly argues for the continuation of capitalism, or even change towards even more cutthroat forms of capitalist competition. Loudly advocating for a system but acting against the principles you advocate is hypocritical. Wanting a different system while complying with the current one due to lack of choice is much less so.
To illustrate by grossly oversimplification: imagine you and a group of your friends go to see a movie together. You want to see <good movie> but they overwhelmingly vote for <Marvel Capeshit Ep MCXVI> so you go see the bad movie. After the movie, everyone thinks that it was dogshit and is complaining about it. You have much more of a right to be angry than they do because they chose the thing and you only went along with it to keep the peace.
I don't even think it's an unfair accusation because they're explicitly individualist virtue ethicists. They're not making some kind of systemic critique. Their problem is with Bad people who make Bad choices and with policies that enable them. Making those exact choices that they castigate others for is the definition of hypocrisy.
I don't know that it's necessarily hypocritical to criticize a policy even if you benefit from it or similar policies. It's kind of the :very-intelligent: "yet you participate in society" but now we approve because it's directed at shitheads.
I don't care about :very-intelligent:, I care about these fucking deadbeats getting 705k for free, it's fucking madness :hypersus:
Meh, who cares. You can't really expect a logical exchange with fash.
The key difference is that workers have the conditions of capitalism forced upon them, which makes their participation in the capitalist system (including purchase of consumer goods like iphones and Starbucks) less than entirely voluntary.
Prager U, on the other hand, constantly argues for the continuation of capitalism, or even change towards even more cutthroat forms of capitalist competition. Loudly advocating for a system but acting against the principles you advocate is hypocritical. Wanting a different system while complying with the current one due to lack of choice is much less so.
To illustrate by grossly oversimplification: imagine you and a group of your friends go to see a movie together. You want to see <good movie> but they overwhelmingly vote for <Marvel Capeshit Ep MCXVI> so you go see the bad movie. After the movie, everyone thinks that it was dogshit and is complaining about it. You have much more of a right to be angry than they do because they chose the thing and you only went along with it to keep the peace.
Yeah sure, maybe logically, but they also aren’t saying ‘I disagree, but money is money’
I don't even think it's an unfair accusation because they're explicitly individualist virtue ethicists. They're not making some kind of systemic critique. Their problem is with Bad people who make Bad choices and with policies that enable them. Making those exact choices that they castigate others for is the definition of hypocrisy.