It's more being highlighted as part of my response to some unusual criticisms of the analysis of how financialization has destituted so many people in the US. Saying that it's somehow trying to paint industrialist exploitation of workers as being okay, but financial exploitation of workers as bad. That's not what highlighting the contradictions between finance and industrial capitalism is about. It's examining the further exploitation of workers more in depth than just looking at the low cost goods taken from poor countries like tropical fruits, and higher wages overall. (Alongside looking at how financialization is disintegrating the economy and deindustrializing the first world BECAUSE of the exploitation of the third world, it's not some Infrared shit about how baristas are the labor aristocracy and only industrial shit matters. People think everything is Patsocs. There's only like 400 patsocs. Most of the likes "patsoc" posts get are coming from African uncles who know what Hillary Clinton Emails Revealed) I'm saying only 10% of the population even belongs to the global labor aristocracy but I'm open to hearing arguments against it. Maybe my definition of labor aristocracy is too narrow.