Never Apologize For Being a Class Traitor (www.hamiltonnolan.com)

submitted 4 days ago by technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/politics@lemmy.world

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Every time a right winger points and laughs at a socialist who was born rich, it should be understood as a desperate attempt to justify their own moral failure to themselves. If you grew up rich and are now a leftist and someone points that out, the proper response is: “Yes I am. Why aren’t you?” I do not believe that there is any plank in the DSA platform that says that nobody is allowed to live in a brownstone that their dad bought. What they say instead is: If your dad has enough money to buy a brownstone, he should be paying higher taxes so that we can build more affordable housing for people who can’t afford brownstones. A rich kid who nods his head and agrees with that assertion and works to raise taxes on himself in the name of social justice is not guilty of hypocrisy at all. He’s exhibiting a commitment to basic fairness. That’s nothing to be ashamed of. Every rich person is morally obligated to do this. It’s the ones who aren’t class traitors that we need to worry about.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] SarahValentine@pawb.social -3 points 2 days ago

I'm sorry if you think someone renting a one bedroom apartment puts them beyond the capacity to consider the issues you face in your daily life, but calling me an idiot isn't going to make it better.

[-] LostCarcosan@lemmy.today 4 points 2 days ago

Well, it's not unwarranted since that's exactly the opposite of what I've said, and exactly what you have said. So, what's your real opinion then, since it apparently just flips according to whatever is covenient for you at the moment

[-] SarahValentine@pawb.social -3 points 2 days ago

Let me spell it out for you: bringing up Mamdani as a counterexample was a stupid move. You got caught with a bad example and instead of admitting to it and walking it back you doubled down trying to say you were somehow so poor that it still counts as a counterexample.

In short, you're the one who doesn't even know wtf you're saying. And that is the end of this.

[-] LostCarcosan@lemmy.today 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Okay you seem to have some quite serious comprehension issues or at least memory issues.

You said:

I also don't care to be represented by people who have no idea how bad their constituents have it - no matter what team they claim to play for. They don't represent me because they can't comprehend me to begin with.

Then when I said that was a stupid take and that it doesn't matter what their upbringing was, if they're doing good work and used myself as an example, you threw a fit, changing your argument and making judgemental assumptions.

You can't even stay consistent in your own arguments and then try to take the superior attitude when you're called out. You're just here to try and sow discontent with actual progressive candidates and make the conservatives more likely to keep control. You're arguing in bad faith or are extremely incapable of logical thought and ThAt iS tHe EnD oF iT.

this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2026

79 points (97.6% liked)

politics

30954 readers

2079 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News