6 ms·

I am consistently surprised at how anti-inequality activists return, again and again, to the same tactic of restating the numerical and relative degree of wealt

I am consistently surprised at how anti-inequality activists return, again and again, to the same tactic of restating the numerical and relative degree of wealth inequality. Like how, every new year, the media publishes the same stories about how Bill Gates / Jeff Bezos / Elon Musk (or whoever the latest richest person is) has earned more than the average person's yearly salary in x number of minutes. This happens despite the repeated, abject failure of this tactic over the past decades to help their cause and create a mass consensus in favour of stronger redistributional measures. It seems to be a common anti-pattern of political activism across the spectrum: Things that are so intrinsically outrageous to activists that they assume their reaction is universal, and that simple exposure to the facts will be enough to convert others.

superbcarrot 6y ago
I think that I agree with the overall sentiment but this > abject failure of this tactic over the past decades to help their cause There isn't a consistent "they" that have a cause. It's a sentiment that moves through society. The people who are outraged about billionaires on the internet today weren't even born a couple of decades ago.
jxramos 6y ago
The way I see it I'd rather live in the place where someone can be that wealthy than a place where it is not possible for someone to be that wealthy. Basically it's better that at least some one can and has made it that big than no one at all.
- pii 6y ago
  Is it the ability for the one person who makes it this big to buy their way out of following the law that's appealing? For me, I like that this amount of wealth depends on exploiting people who aren't as good as I am. It makes me feel like I am winning.
hansbo 6y ago
I find the public opinion has change drastically - nowadays pretty much everyone I socialize with agree the current and growing wealth inequality is absurd and unsustainable. Large numbers are very difficult to understand, which is why I think things like this website works.
pgsandstrom 6y ago
> This happens despite the repeated, abject failure of this tactic over the past decades to help their cause How do you measure this? Socialism hasn't taken over, thus it didn't help their cause? There are many factors at play, so you can't make and simple conclusions about a single strategy like this.

superbcarrot 6y ago

I think that I agree with the overall sentiment but this > abject failure of this tactic over the past decades to help their cause There isn't a consistent "they" that have a cause. It's a sentiment that moves through society. The people who are outraged about billionaires on the internet today weren't even born a couple of decades ago.

jxramos 6y ago

The way I see it I'd rather live in the place where someone can be that wealthy than a place where it is not possible for someone to be that wealthy. Basically it's better that at least some one can and has made it that big than no one at all.

pii 6y ago
Is it the ability for the one person who makes it this big to buy their way out of following the law that's appealing? For me, I like that this amount of wealth depends on exploiting people who aren't as good as I am. It makes me feel like I am winning.

hansbo 6y ago

I find the public opinion has change drastically - nowadays pretty much everyone I socialize with agree the current and growing wealth inequality is absurd and unsustainable. Large numbers are very difficult to understand, which is why I think things like this website works.

pgsandstrom 6y ago

> This happens despite the repeated, abject failure of this tactic over the past decades to help their cause How do you measure this? Socialism hasn't taken over, thus it didn't help their cause? There are many factors at play, so you can't make and simple conclusions about a single strategy like this.