I suspect that “progressive” politics is at its core basically a means of cartel formation. Adam Smith theorized that actors denigrated their own trade to keep people from wanting to become actors, thereby lowering the number of people who want to become actors and increasing their own wages. Maybe left-wing politics serves the same purpose. They always seem to be weirdly strong in trades where there is a huge amount of demand for those positions, professorships, creative jobs, government service, etc. If you can’t keep others out by lowering wages, thereby defeating the whole purpose of the trade, you can maybe keep people out by making the notion of working with you so toxic that most people will just stay away.

@LostInCalifornia@spinster.xyz @GrumpyOldNurse@spinster.xyz Schizophrenia is one hell of a drug.

@GrumpyOldNurse@spinster.xyz @LostInCalifornia@spinster.xyz "Gender" was basically a synonym for "sex" like 5 years ago. The only reason you'd assert otherwise is to confuse people.

@lewdthewides@poa.st @julian398a@varishangout.net @DiceySpikes@varishangout.net @SaintfelixVI@poa.st @lurkimutt@poa.st One is the purest form of love, the other is degenerates and faggots. Can not agree more.

I was reading about how overproduction of "elites" is the primary driving force behind civil conflict, and how one of the best examples of this is the massive increase in the number of lawyers per capita in the USA. If you want an example of how overproduction of "elites", in particular lawyers, can drive civil conflict, look at Pat Robertson, who didn't "find god" until he failed the New York bar exam, or Weather Underground, who were funded by the National Lawyers Guild.