26 Comments
User's avatar
Betty Landercasper's avatar

I think Grumpy Chinese is spot on with his analysis.

I am an old white lady. I’d like to see our corporations pay a real living wage. I think that is the only way capitalism can survive: those at the top must be less greedy or the whole thing will collapse.

Nate Reynolds's avatar

If they were less greedy then it wouldn’t be capitalism

Screenwriter's Yarn's avatar

Say it loud for those in the back! 👏👏👏👏

Shiva3d's avatar

I wish you would run for public office

Neil Zhu's avatar

then my reach will be limited.

tteague1's avatar

This analysis is absolutely spot-on -- thank you so much for this!

Once upon a time the Dems used to be the party of organized labor and the working class. Unions were the party's biggest constituency.

The problem is that labor unions in America have never been ideological or had class consciousness like the explicitly Communist unions in other countries. In fact, in America we'd rather let our unions be controlled by the Mafia than by Communists. And they have been.

So once the Dems dumped labor for management starting in the 1970s, the working class embraced right-wing 'populism' because it seemed to be the only thing on offer.

Seth's avatar

Good stuff. I am reading David Rieff’s book Desire and Fate which criticizes Woke from the class-conscious left. Highly recommended.

Neil Zhu's avatar

thank you, i will take a look

Coyote Mama's avatar

ON POINT as a super sharp pencil ✏️

黑猴王 (Black Monkey King)'s avatar

With such an excellent analyses of the systemic issues in US American politics one could decisively and undeniable also say that the USA is actually not a Democracy, and possibly never was, but is a ruthless global “race” and culture-wars-waging fascist big business system.

Why?

Without any equivalently functional actual left representing all the common people, the working class and the poorest in a multi-party system, no system, no matter how it cloaks itself delusional as the “greatest” is actually great or let alone a democracy.

Neil Zhu's avatar

Yes yes yes!👏

Neil Zhu's avatar

I have been thinking about this for a long time, working class are the masses , the multi party system won’t represent them properly.

Susan Thoms's avatar

Grumpy Chinese has accurately stated the case. The Left needs to grow a spine and truly fight for the issues that matter: wages, housing, health care.

Travis Valdov1nos's avatar

Yes!

Derek Clement, B.Ch.E.'s avatar

Your subtitle was perfect. And I think your social logic is spot on. The part of this whole mess I have a hard time understanding for myself is whether or not management for managements sake isn’t the enemy inherently. In an accelerating technological world, maybe it’s really important to prevent national disaster on an even deeper level than we’re currently facing. I’d have loved for Bernie to take office in 2016, his vision of change seemed grand but possible. The meta problem is that Democrat’s “management” seems to be for their own interests and not for the country’s growth/stability… but how can I make that judgement? I have no idea how many management decisions are actually made and how each one of them entangles with others and could topple the house of cards we’ve been building chaotically since our country’s inception. Regardless… the current Republican Party ain’t it - lies and deceit don’t begot stability or prosperity. But I, like you, empathize with those who turned to it out of anger and a sense of abandonment.

Neil Zhu's avatar

Thank you for reading this :)

Derek Clement, B.Ch.E.'s avatar

I’ve been a fan! And love the name of your channel 😂

Neil Zhu's avatar

Thank you, 😃

Chris Vail's avatar

"Management for management's sake...". In Silicon Valley prepandemic commute traffic on freeways was 20 mph from 6:00 AM to 10:00 AM Monday through Friday, and 3:00 PM to 8:00 PM the other way. During the pandemic people worked from home and did Zoom meetings. The freeways were open; people could speed during commute hours. That's how much management cost society by insisting on seeing bodies.

But do we need this? When Linus Torvalds created Linux as an open source OS supported by volunteer developers, he ended the career of project management, replacing it with package management. You don't need to see bodies to integrate software contributions into packages, you just need well defined procedures.

To the extant that people deal with information rather than tangible products (and money is information), how much of our economy can be transformed by replacing overseers with well defined procedures?

We are still dealing with the legacy of slavery in the US.

Derek Clement, B.Ch.E.'s avatar

In that sense, the entire world is for the most part.

Derek Clement, B.Ch.E.'s avatar

That’s a very grand way to say: “people are bad at both producing and following instructions”, then make an even grander comparison: “modern economic living in the United States is akin to slavery”

I often idealize a world where everyone is good at both producing and following instructions. The problem is… there’s no correct answers to anything permanently. The instructions that work best as always changing. That’s why we’ll always be bad at it, and why we’ll always feel oppressed even as tech gets really good. We’re only as well off as we’re able to keep up with what’s right, RIGHT NOW. But we all move at different paces, at the same moment. Not everyone person can be aligned to the point where we agree on what the right instructions are. Nor the right way to follow them properly.

Sigh 😅

Neil Zhu's avatar

That's why we need a governing system that is extremely pragmatic and flexible for its policies. no government can make everyone happy, but at least a large portion of it would be good enough.

Derek Clement, B.Ch.E.'s avatar

Does that mean I’m a libertarian now?? lol I agree. But exactly what we can responsibly decide to make flexible and what needs to be hardcoded law gets us right back to the “who’s the most right, right now, and for how long” conundrum. Some things need to be hardcoded for long term stability… like the checks and balances/separation of powers…. Hopefully that house stops burning down soon.

James Klaczynski's avatar

I don’t see the “fake left” as a genuine middle-class movement at all, but as the political wing of a globalist project that dominated the 1990–2024 unipolar era. After the Soviet collapse, when the U.S. stood as sole superpower, real strategic direction came from transnational corporate, financial, NGO, and security networks. The so-called progressive class was not the architect of this order, but its minion layer, hired to administer it.

The progressive brand functioned as moral cover. Rhetoric about minority empowerment and social justice helped legitimize a restructuring that systematically weakened the old blue-collar, patriotic, military-adjacent middle class whose loyalties were rooted in the American nation rather than in international networks. That class was structurally hostile to an international usurpation of U.S. sovereignty, so it had to be disempowered.

Now that the globalist order is unwinding and power is pivoting back toward nationalism or at least regionalism, the fake left is being exposed as what it always was: a professional-managerial and NGO apparatus whose “leftism” was mostly moral PR in service of an anti-American restructuring, not a serious defense of working-class interests.

Steve Mudge's avatar

In addition to the covert protection of "capitalism for the few", Democrats Achilles heel is being beholden to donors, many on the far, far left espousing extreme versions of environmentalism, gender swamp, immigration, etc. Along with Biden's profligate stimulus spending adding to inflation it was those extreme ideals which sunk the Democrats.