I would say that is just the new 'rich kids get boring' stories in our post-modern/post-truth world, and the fashion right now is to dress/act as their imagined oppressed.
Cruel pleasure indeed.
41–50 of 182 posts
I would say that is just the new 'rich kids get boring' stories in our post-modern/post-truth world, and the fashion right now is to dress/act as their imagined oppressed.
Cruel pleasure indeed.
It seems the ‘eternal adolescence’ of the modern mind is effecting class dynamics.
At MIT I remember being told that we were expected to be the best in the world at a particular technical subject. I remember a mixed feeling of awe and trepidation at being told of the responsibility we held to society.
I hope the elite can improve and practice sacrificial leadership for the betterment of all.
The articles contends the rich kids at Yale pretend to be poor to shirk the elite responsibilities, which then leads to deterioration of the elites. I find it doubtful that the kids have thought it through that far. A couple of more likely explanations come to mind: - Rebellious teenagers always want to establish independence from their parents. Giving up part of the money takes you part of the way there. - It's hard…
The articles contends the rich kids at Yale pretend to be poor to shirk the elite responsibilities, which then leads to deterioration of the elites. I find it doubtful that the kids have thought it through that far. A couple of more likely explanations come to mind: - Rebellious teenagers always want to establish independence from their parents. Giving up part of the money takes you part of the way there. - It's hard…
Hopefully the fight turns to sucking carbon out of the air and creating a sustainable future.
i was rooting for some weighty insight but was disappointed by a lack of perspective and coherence. the author writes at length about what yale, and the problem, isn't and much less about about the consequences and potential avenues to shape them. she seems to lack enough life experience to put her critiques into a wider context that's relevant much beyond yale. for instance, the ivy league is viewed through the lens…
Interestingly, I found parallels for what she was describing in much of society these days. The comics, games, movies, anime, etc... industries are all going through this same sort of thing. And if you look at the skeletal structure of what she describes going on at Yale, it's mirrored almost perfectly in those spheres.
The articles contends the rich kids at Yale pretend to be poor to shirk the elite responsibilities, which then leads to deterioration of the elites. I find it doubtful that the kids have thought it through that far. A couple of more likely explanations come to mind: - Rebellious teenagers always want to establish independence from their parents. Giving up part of the money takes you part of the way there. - It's hard…
Also, middle class struggle makes life more meaningful.
The author herself appears to be biased by this. She believes that the “rich elites” have a great burden of responsibility towards the world, which she justifies with shaky zero sum logic that suggests that because they have more, they necessarily took it from those who have less (her bulky villager metaphor). She might not be openly jealous, but she still seems to believe that her rich peers must somehow earn this wealth (an undefined and likely impossible undertaking), and writes about them with condescension when she sees they do not meet her burden.
The kind of “rich elite” that attends Yale—that is to say a child who has access to vast sums of wealth they themselves did not amass—is an otherwise normal person who simply wants to live a happy life. Some end up president, some end up “gypsies”, but as the observes all of them have learned that in order to pursue these goals unmolested they have to put on the cloak of being less privileged than those around them. If they don’t, they’ll drown in a sea of hate from those of lesser means than them.
Thats it. There’s no mystery here, just a bunch of kids trying to avoid being systematically bullied for circumstances outside of their control.
Economic inequality is at its highest level since 1928 and is about to increase even more due to automation, this climate of victimization/identity politics is being increasingly forced at a higher level by corporations, a simple way to build goodwill in the public opinion and feel that they are in the right.
I think the author is ascribing too much intent to a simple economy of shame that’s omnipresent in all classes; if people find out you have more than they do, they hate you. The author herself appears to be biased by this. She believes that the “rich elites” have a great burden of responsibility towards the world, which she justifies with shaky zero sum logic that suggests that because they have more, they necessaril…
Whatever the reason, it would have to be something that is not common to all times and places, because the college-age children of the ruling class don't always act this way. One wonders if, for example, the equivalent demographic in China (a rising power) acts this way.