Preaching at people that they’re privileged isn’t good praxis. It doesn’t appeal to their material conditions.
Yeah, it's not really wrong, but it's extremely counterproductive.
A socialist telling the average working westerner living paycheck to paycheck about how they're part of the labor aristocracy isn't going to sound any different to them than a chud doing the "you have a smartphone and a refrigerator so ackshully you're better off than historical monarchs" thing.
people struggling to get by and suffering every day aren't really getting anything out of their privilege. when things are bad enough it doesn't matter that they could be worse.
I mean, yes but no? Americans have it rough but their living standards have not plummeted to anything near those of countries which had revolutions, save segments of extreme poverty (particularly run-down parts of cities, poor rural communities in Appalachia, etc). They still have the "privilege" to be able to just barely scrape by with maybe a treat or two as a benefit of the US's continued exploitation of the rest of the world, even if it's not apparent to them.
Which is why I'm opposed to framing it as "privilege" or "aristocracy", since it provokes an unnecessary moralistic "debates" which go nowhere.
Yeah, it's not really wrong, but it's extremely counterproductive.
A socialist telling the average working westerner living paycheck to paycheck about how they're part of the labor aristocracy isn't going to sound any different to them than a chud doing the "you have a smartphone and a refrigerator so ackshully you're better off than historical monarchs" thing.
people struggling to get by and suffering every day aren't really getting anything out of their privilege. when things are bad enough it doesn't matter that they could be worse.
I mean, yes but no? Americans have it rough but their living standards have not plummeted to anything near those of countries which had revolutions, save segments of extreme poverty (particularly run-down parts of cities, poor rural communities in Appalachia, etc). They still have the "privilege" to be able to just barely scrape by with maybe a treat or two as a benefit of the US's continued exploitation of the rest of the world, even if it's not apparent to them.
Which is why I'm opposed to framing it as "privilege" or "aristocracy", since it provokes an unnecessary moralistic "debates" which go nowhere.
The floor of human misery experienced right now in imperialized countries is so much lower than typical American poverty.
Yeah, but it feels good to the person doing the denouncing. That's the part I think you're missing.
Material conditions? No, emotional conditions.