fairly in-depth analysis of how inequality is reproduced and how it started. Turns out, giving corporations the same rights as people wasn't a good idea. Who woulda thunk it?
My biggest takeaway is the sheer amount of economic reification that goes on in our society. What the corporatocracy wants us to view as a natural function, an immutable fact of the watertight science of economics, tends to be a manipulable condition set by the government and played with by corporate boardrooms. This idea underscores my hesitancy to even have a discussion about economics with someone, because most economic beliefs, especially in our neoliberal paradigm, boil down to a kind of economic determinism.
Another key takeaway, as I read more and more and learn more and more about society in general, is my culpability in that system just by nature of being in the relationships I'm in. We live in a cognitively dissonant society, and I can't help but feel like everything I read is some kind of CIA psyop feeding me analysis that is inaccurate or "what they want me to believe." Maybe I'm paranoid, or maybe it's just the nature of my privileged position in society.
There is hope. Schwalbe talks a lot about the way that our interactions foster inequality. Things like sexist language, stereotypes, and the way we interact with each other in general, whether that's relationships between professors and students, bosses and employees, children and parents, strangers, etc. This perspective really energizes my thirst for different perspectives, a thirst everyone really needs. Yes, I'm talking about affirmative actioning the YouTube algorithms, the books you read, and all around the content you consume.
Schwalbe also has kind of given me hope for a cooptation of the current system by the people, but also I don't know there is still a lot of vestigal stuff in our society ie economic mechanisms that are completely manmade and exist to perpetuate inequality. One problem I have with the book is that he talks about invisible ideologies, while at the same time defines ideology in a way that is both inconsistent with the popular conception of ideologies and excuses himself from having to disclose his own ideology. Maybe its because he's an anarchist and wouldn't get published by oxford if he did, or maybe he's a CIA psyop. Fuck.