3 ms·

I mostly agree with your take on the article (though I admit I skimmed some paragraphs), but I think this bit was probably intentional: > the lampooning of the

I mostly agree with your take on the article (though I admit I skimmed some paragraphs), but I think this bit was probably intentional: > the lampooning of the modern liberal elite and their practices, such as the author does in this article, is itself done as way of asserting a different class's moral superiority over another Unfortunately, I think the most effective way to counter a status move is not through reasoned argument, but with a status move of one's own. If you can turn the status symbol into something ridiculous or embarassing, you've successfully undermined it. This is (usually) most easily done via public mockery.

AnimalMuppet 8y ago
Yes and no. You've undermined the public expression of the status move. But pride is all over the place, from things that look like pride, to "I'm not proud like those people, I'm down to earth" - and proud of it, to (another turn of the screw) "I don't do false humility like those people". It's the human condition to find someone to look down on to feel better about yourself. You can perhaps make people stop expressing it publicly, but you aren't likely to change hearts very much. (And when you do, you'll most likely make someone realize that having pride in that is stupid, so they'll change to having pride in something else.)
ravitation 8y ago
To be honest (given the lack of thoughtfulness that went into writing this article), I do think it was done intentionally, but I also think the author did not consider how doing so undermined his argument entirely. The author's primary argument is that all of these practices of the liberal elite are done to "prop up class dominance", and that this need to "prop up class dominance" is one thing that makes mainstream values inferior to (presumably the author's) "socialist values". This is of course undermined when the author chooses to engage in exactly the same act of "asserting [...] moral superiority" that he is basing his critique on.

AnimalMuppet 8y ago

Yes and no. You've undermined the public expression of the status move. But pride is all over the place, from things that look like pride, to "I'm not proud like those people, I'm down to earth" - and proud of it, to (another turn of the screw) "I don't do false humility like those people". It's the human condition to find someone to look down on to feel better about yourself. You can perhaps make people stop expressing it publicly, but you aren't likely to change hearts very much. (And when you do, you'll most likely make someone realize that having pride in that is stupid, so they'll change to having pride in something else.)

ravitation 8y ago

To be honest (given the lack of thoughtfulness that went into writing this article), I do think it was done intentionally, but I also think the author did not consider how doing so undermined his argument entirely. The author's primary argument is that all of these practices of the liberal elite are done to "prop up class dominance", and that this need to "prop up class dominance" is one thing that makes mainstream values inferior to (presumably the author's) "socialist values". This is of course undermined when the author chooses to engage in exactly the same act of "asserting [...] moral superiority" that he is basing his critique on.