[giwook]

I think this is an unfortunate consequence of the state of politics in the US (and in many other countries tbh).

Collectively we should really be getting angry with wealth inequality but those with wealth stir up any number of other issues (e.g. race, religion, gender, etc) in order to divert attention from them continuing to get richer at our collective expense.

[bigyabai]

> Collectively we should really be getting angry with wealth inequality

But individually we're unable to abandon YouTube, iPhones and Windows 11. America's biggest B2C companies can do whatever they want and we'll all lap it up.

[dghlsakjg]

You’re not going to believe this but I’m a windows, YouTube and iPhone user, and am still pretty angry at the state of things.

You can be a customer of large companies and still be angry that large capital holders are tremendously advantaged in many ways.

[satvikpendem]

Sure, but as a user don't expect to be able to change anything though, because companies know you won't switch away from their products.

[dghlsakjg]

I’m not at all sure that switching to Linux for my gaming pc will effectively address the root causes of wealth inequality.

I suspect that taxing corporations and capital gains at the same rate as earned income from labor would do far more to solve that problem.

[Paracompact]

YouTube is essentially a social network so fair enough, but is some external force compelling you to use Windows or an iPhone?

[bigyabai]

Absolutely, I'm highlighting that you're a captive audience and every single FAANG exec knows it when they kiss the Trumpian ring.

Microsoft, Google and Apple all decided to side with the fed. Your outrage is inconsequential to them, and with the sum they spend on lobbying it's doubtful that your vote even matters to them either.

[sublinear]

Those "distractions" would be brought up regardless of any wealth inequality. They're entirely unrelated.

Depending on who you ask, those same topics are considered distractions from any other topic including each other.

What you're really describing is the attention bottleneck in a western democratic society where everybody wants the world to see things their way. That's the wrong mindset for democracy to work. If you want people to believe something it's simple: don't be wrong. Don't be vague and don't be misleading. Stop assuming the opposing side is stupid. Just speak clearly.

We really should blame ourselves for coming to every discussion with trivially incorrect arguments. People are so lazy these days. Slacktivism and terrorism used to be the extremes reserved for the ignorant. We used to shame and mock those people.

[PaulHoule]

(1) The relationship between economic and cultural issues has been the most controversial topic on the left since the 1970s. If you take Marxism seriously, for instance, cultural issues are very much a distraction from class conflict. In the 1980s many of us thought Reagan had pulled off a major gambit by prioritizing cultural issues like abortion to turn voters against social democracy. (Look at Thatcher in the UK for something that problematizes that opinion)

Today writers like Catherine Liu and Joan Williams will tell you all about how movements grounded in the “professional managerial class” fall flat with the working class.

In general viable political movements need something that appeals to people with money and something that appeals more broadly.

(2) These conflicts can be seen as often being zero sum conflicts over irreconcilable values and whether or not rational thought applies is beyond the point. E.g. if you think abortion is wrong you think abortion is wrong.

(3) The basic mistake people I think is that people look at causes through the same framework when in reality these are all different and if you try to treat them as the same… you lose people and in the end you lose.