From e5a5e9827ce6ab5e5032e937d4e796a874c11ead Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Deepak Jois Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2024 16:51:37 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] Obsidian Sync 2024-11-19 16:51:37 --- content/daily-notes/2024-11-19.md | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/content/daily-notes/2024-11-19.md b/content/daily-notes/2024-11-19.md index 309462ed..993c8d87 100644 --- a/content/daily-notes/2024-11-19.md +++ b/content/daily-notes/2024-11-19.md @@ -73,11 +73,11 @@ From a review in [The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/n > This is not simply cynicism or hypocrisy, Al-Gharbi argues. Symbolic capitalists have constructed myths about their social roles that allow them genuinely to believe in fairness and equity while entrenching inequality and injustice, myths that have been accepted by many social institutions and power-brokers. The consequence is that the language of social justice has helped “legitimize and obscure inequalities”, allowing sections of the elite to “reinforce their elite status… often at the expense of those who are genuinely vulnerable, marginalized and disadvantaged”. #### A Materialist Analysis of US Election Results -[Why Are Poor Americans Voting for the Party of the Rich? | Listen Notes](https://lnns.co/lANz_msVn-U) #materialism +[Why Are Poor Americans Voting for the Party of the Rich? | Ones and Tooze Podcast](https://lnns.co/lANz_msVn-U) #materialism Adam Tooze gave from what all I have read, a really fresh analysis of the US election results from a materialist theory perspective. It's a rather long quote I picked out from the transcript, but it's really worth it. I really like the high analogy at the end between Kamala as a "spelling-bee girl" and Trump as a "high-living frat boy", both throwing a party and where the "academically unambitious high-school girls" (an analogy of white non-college educated women) would go. -The Professional Managerial Class (PMC) as an analytical category that +The Professional Managerial Class (PMC) as an analytical category that I covered in the sections above also make an appearance. > Yeah, this is a great question. And I mean, I think at the most general level, the issue with materialism and the critics of materialism—materialism being the big, grand, metaphysical, almost philosophical idea that it's what we eat that determines who we are more than what we think. It's realities, it's the means through which and the way in which we reproduce our lives that shapes identities and assumptions about the world, right? That basic premise. >