(yes this guy actually thinks elon buying twitter is a step toward saving society)

richardhanania.substack.com/p/plutocracy-the-alternative-to-caesarism

what no theory does to a mf

С кем ты сейчас разговариваешь? Кого ты думаешь, что видишь? Ты знаешь, сколько я зарабатываю в год? Я имею в виду, даже если бы я сказал тебе, ты бы не поверил. Знаете, что было бы, если бы я вдруг решил перестать ходить на работу? Бизнес, достаточно большой, чтобы его можно было котировать на NASDAQ, разоряется. Исчезает! Он перестает существовать без меня. Нет, вы явно не знаете, с кем разговариваете, так что позвольте мне подсказать вам. Мне ничего не угрожает, Скайлер. Я опасен. Парень открывает дверь и в него стреляют, и ты думаешь обо мне так же? нет. Я тот, кто стучит!

How are plutocrats not libs

Liberalism made them

because this guy has never read anything in his entire life except the news, twitter, and american policy papers

Based on the headline is this like some Nick Land type s*** lol

no i promise you this is way funnier

I’ll read later after I take these shrooms

this guy has never read any form of theory in his life so this is the musings of a guy whose entire philosophical foundation is twitter and news media

i actually read the article and plz to god tell me he doesn’t have any influence

From India, Modi's government personally wrote him a letter thanking him for his strong contributions to politics and being a guiding light on policy
Also, he has a direct line to the China's politburo because he's a chinaboo who's friends with their US diplomats
he owns an academic "nonprofit policy center" in the US which policy makers do actually cite

its funny how 90% of the time his takes are more sensible than average (not saying much maybe considering the average) then 10% of the time hes just completely off the reservation (usually with a libertarian or quasi-lolbert take)

society if someone didn't groom richard hanania into being a libertarian in undergrad

Would he still be singing this tune if George Soros bought Twitter?

ofc no but i think he might say that that would still be preferable to the current option, where George Soros uses his money to influence activists whose "organized pressure" on organizations like Twitter allows his will to be exerted in a less obvious, and less open, way, and with plausible deniability, versus just buying it outright where everyone can say "well George Soros owns Twitter, what do ya expect" and act accordingly

I liked Hanania in the beginning where he was just talking about foreign policy and statistical manipulation of said policy (namely war) through media outlets and bureaucracy. He's very knowledgeable on that subject and his commentary was actually valuable. Since then he's done the usual twitter pundit "validation for the one thing i know about qualifies me to speak on everything else in existence" thing, and he's been borderline mentally disabled on more than half of his domestic policy/social phenomena takes.

what do you think he gets wrong on his antiwoke tip?

he cares way more about waxing poetic over disconnected culture war conflicts in a vacuum rather than the origin of why these conflicts matter to begin with, and often contradicts himself in trying to concoct stances measured between principled positions and supposed causal phenomena

Dude is just setting the standard.

Need George Soros v Peter Thiel hell in a cell match to decide every election

no matter who comes out the victor its one less billionaire alive, everyone wins

Don't know who this guy is, but half way through reading that it's obvious that he is at best another trending topic "for/against" grifter, or at worst — likely simultaneously — a troll. (The two have the same motives functionally; grift by trolling and troll as a grift.)

But the final paragraph — where he finally begins defining the titular proposal for the first time in the whole piece — pretty much seals it for me:

"Plutocracy has the fewest problems, mainly because rich guys are smarter, less neurotic, and have higher testosterone levels than activists and bureaucrats ..."

I mean c'mon. The guy clearly banks on the naïveté of people who are genuinely inclined to think this way, while increasing his public notoriety by being exactly the kind of person his ideological opponents complain about to their peers (many of whom are playing the same game as he is).

I refuse to believe anyone with the kind of education that this guy credits himself with in his biography can possibly be sincere in proposing that the rich & bureaucratic classes and the woke are opposing forces. The former has turned the latter into a new form of PR and recruitment marketing, in addition to creating an entirely new contractor job market that targets both low-level and corporate business with promises of better work performance and public image.

If nothing else, any person who complains about twitter while actively chasing social/commercial benefits on twitter, should be ignored (along with the whole of twitter).

I hate to tell you this but this guy is not a troll, this is a legitimate editorial and he actually believes everything he's writing on his substack. He is also not a nobody and has received policy awards and government acknowledgements by foreign diplomats before. I'm just posting it for the lol factor though, idk how you can see an article like this and not laugh at its ridiculousness

Thought this was gonna be James Lindsey before I opened thread

Oh i was laughing at it and i know he's not a nobody based on the education credentials i mentioned. I'm just numb to the "person on social media complains about hot topic on social media to increase their celebrity on social media."

My immediate reaction is: If this person has a stable career and (likely above average) income — and they don't rely on reader subscriptions as part of that income — then they must have an ulterior motive to rationalize spending so much of their time self-publishing articles and maintaining steady streams of opinionated tweets surrounding screaming-match topics.

Of course it could always be the common culprit narcissism that infects just about every person who discovers a way to increase the attention they receive online. But the pure incoherence and contradiction of his ideas in this piece alone (not to mention the use of universally known meme insults) just makes me suspicious. He could very well be genuine with his bullshit like you say though — it's just hard for me accept that I guess.

Bro how are people this mad about lgbt. Lots of us arent even liberals what is this

I just want free healthcare this arguing over these things seem unimportant