As an Indian American woman from the working class and born of parents without degrees, I can confirm that the class chasm between myself and the rest of my Indian American peers illustrates that race or ethnicity cannot transcend class origin. In fact, people of different non white ethnic groups reserve a special contempt for those of their own group who didn’t make it to the bourgeoisie. Not even being upper caste made up for my family’s financial situation. When I went to a state school, I was aware of being lumped into an ethnic group but it was clear I came from a different orientation than my wealthy peers. I was more direct in my communication, for one thing.
I think women have a special incentive to take on the mantle of gender and racial oppression, especially if they’re not white, because we know that white people will see us as morally superior (along the lines of the study) and it’ll give us social clout among women in particular. Leftist social media culture is less about justice and more about clout chasing and climbing the hierarchy among women, all while laying thirst traps.
I would like to see more exploration of gender in these dynamics among affluent students. I know men are outside the inner world of women, but I would be curious about Rob’s experiences with these people vis-a-vis gender.
I think the concept of "luxury beliefs" is one of the most important developments in the modern culture wars; however, I feel it is not biting enough in criticism of those that wield it given the obvious significant harm it causes. To tell someone they are committed to luxury beliefs sounds like a complement. I prefer to tell them they are committed to luxury virtue signaling. I think this is right as many, if not most, of them don't really hold any principles of belief... they would just flip to the opposite if determined it would benefit their status pursuits. A good example is DEI. While many of my so called liberal progressive friends have defended it (see Mark Cuban who has stepped in it with his X debate with Musk), more are flipping 180 degrees to claim it is destructive and unfair. I don't think they care at all that it is destructive and unfair... they just want to be in the pocket of upper class popular memes.
Very glad to see your upcoming book is so well received and finally getting the attention it deserves. The City Journal review was excellent and I noted this portion “ Troubled’s penultimate chapter, which might be subtitled “What I Learned at Yale,” is a tour de force that in a more rational world would be required reading for all incoming college students at elite schools.” Facts.
The cult of victimhood in the modern era is fascinating, especially when it is heavily promoted by the meritocracy that you'd think would be pragmatic and realistic. I do have some thoughts for why this should be the case. But what I also find is how the pecking orders of victims periodically shuffle. Gays are no longer "victims," for example, but the latest right end of the alphabet unquestionably are. And in the same light, it would explain the sudden explosion in the number of self-referenced bisexuals, almost all women and almost all who report being in relationships with the opposite gender. But they get a label and no one can question it!
I am fascinated by the virtuous victim effect, attributing greater moral virtues to someone seen a victim. There is something distinctly quasi-religious about it. But what is it really all about? And what for? Surely it has something to do with people's perceived notions of justice and what is just and how to bring it about and their quest for an ideal society. But where is the origin of such thinking, especially as it is happening among people who are generally anti-religion. I do write a great deal about justice and history and I can spot a strange marriage of Christian morality with Soviet utopianism (the Soviet Union made enemies out of former "oppressor" classes and privileged the former "oppressed"). But while our new moralism is neither Christian nor Soviet, it has borrowed the frameworks of both beliefs.
I enjoy your observations, Rob. Always look forward to them.
The second to last paragraph is the point of everything you've been talking about over the last few years... "The requirements for the upper class to take you seriously—credentials, wealth, power—are also the grounds to brand you a hypocrite for daring to judge." Great piece, keep pounding the drum.
So glad your ideas are penetrating the public consciousness in nation wide news media.
As an Indian American woman from the working class and born of parents without degrees, I can confirm that the class chasm between myself and the rest of my Indian American peers illustrates that race or ethnicity cannot transcend class origin. In fact, people of different non white ethnic groups reserve a special contempt for those of their own group who didn’t make it to the bourgeoisie. Not even being upper caste made up for my family’s financial situation. When I went to a state school, I was aware of being lumped into an ethnic group but it was clear I came from a different orientation than my wealthy peers. I was more direct in my communication, for one thing.
I think women have a special incentive to take on the mantle of gender and racial oppression, especially if they’re not white, because we know that white people will see us as morally superior (along the lines of the study) and it’ll give us social clout among women in particular. Leftist social media culture is less about justice and more about clout chasing and climbing the hierarchy among women, all while laying thirst traps.
I would like to see more exploration of gender in these dynamics among affluent students. I know men are outside the inner world of women, but I would be curious about Rob’s experiences with these people vis-a-vis gender.
Awesome publicity progress! Go Rob!
I think the concept of "luxury beliefs" is one of the most important developments in the modern culture wars; however, I feel it is not biting enough in criticism of those that wield it given the obvious significant harm it causes. To tell someone they are committed to luxury beliefs sounds like a complement. I prefer to tell them they are committed to luxury virtue signaling. I think this is right as many, if not most, of them don't really hold any principles of belief... they would just flip to the opposite if determined it would benefit their status pursuits. A good example is DEI. While many of my so called liberal progressive friends have defended it (see Mark Cuban who has stepped in it with his X debate with Musk), more are flipping 180 degrees to claim it is destructive and unfair. I don't think they care at all that it is destructive and unfair... they just want to be in the pocket of upper class popular memes.
“Luxury virtue signaling”….this idea explains what I was seeing on Facebook during the unrestrained and unrestricted George Floyd public tantrums.
Very glad to see your upcoming book is so well received and finally getting the attention it deserves. The City Journal review was excellent and I noted this portion “ Troubled’s penultimate chapter, which might be subtitled “What I Learned at Yale,” is a tour de force that in a more rational world would be required reading for all incoming college students at elite schools.” Facts.
The cult of victimhood in the modern era is fascinating, especially when it is heavily promoted by the meritocracy that you'd think would be pragmatic and realistic. I do have some thoughts for why this should be the case. But what I also find is how the pecking orders of victims periodically shuffle. Gays are no longer "victims," for example, but the latest right end of the alphabet unquestionably are. And in the same light, it would explain the sudden explosion in the number of self-referenced bisexuals, almost all women and almost all who report being in relationships with the opposite gender. But they get a label and no one can question it!
I am fascinated by the virtuous victim effect, attributing greater moral virtues to someone seen a victim. There is something distinctly quasi-religious about it. But what is it really all about? And what for? Surely it has something to do with people's perceived notions of justice and what is just and how to bring it about and their quest for an ideal society. But where is the origin of such thinking, especially as it is happening among people who are generally anti-religion. I do write a great deal about justice and history and I can spot a strange marriage of Christian morality with Soviet utopianism (the Soviet Union made enemies out of former "oppressor" classes and privileged the former "oppressed"). But while our new moralism is neither Christian nor Soviet, it has borrowed the frameworks of both beliefs.
I enjoy your observations, Rob. Always look forward to them.
The second to last paragraph is the point of everything you've been talking about over the last few years... "The requirements for the upper class to take you seriously—credentials, wealth, power—are also the grounds to brand you a hypocrite for daring to judge." Great piece, keep pounding the drum.
Thanks for the secret reading list. Just bought six of your recommendations—even the textbook.