[munksbeer]

>It’s you and the ghost of Marie Antoinette against the world huh.

That is silly. The populist zeitgeist is very much anti "the thing they call neoliberalism".

But the argument is ridiculously shallow. It cherry picks a few decades in human history, in a few western countries, where we observed very high increases of standard of living. It then sets that as the standard by which we should compare to.

It does not lower itself to examine, what caused that period in all of human history? How did it compare to 50 years prior to that period? Does it make sense to set that period as the benchmark? In other words, was it an anomaly, what caused the anomaly, was it sustainable?

None of this is addressed in any social media post (reddit, hn, wherever). It is far easier to just repeat the manta.