Priyamvada Gopal is part of a class of elite academics in the imperial core who teach the ruling class, and use woke radlib rhetoric to justify current Western imperial aggression.

She echoes propaganda against Syria, Iran, and China and is silent about Venezuela, Nicaragua, etc

Anti-anti-imperialist Cambridge University Professor @PriyamvadaGopal smears opponents of the Western neocolonial war on Syria as "Assadists"

Would she ever call liberal imperialist Obama a "blood-soaked cretin"? He has exponentially more blood on him
https://t.co/arUYuHgC8r
The CIA spent over a billion dollars per year arming and training "rebels" who massacred and ethnically cleansed Syrian civilians, especially religious minorities.

But anti-anti-imperialist @PriyamvadaGopal insists these CIA-backed contras are heroes
https://t.co/vjpfxII34q
This was elite anti-anti-imperialist Cambridge University gatekeeper @PriyamvadaGopal's response right after colonial powers the US, UK, and France bombed Syria in April 2018 on bogus lies that have since been debunked.
https://t.co/vR642Jjdgf
Of course anti-anti-imperialist Cambridge Professor @PriyamvadaGopal's is also a supporter of the neoliberal imperialist European Union -- one of the key institutions of European necolonialism today
https://t.co/Uevotk23gL
Here is anti-anti-imperialist @PriyamvadaGopal sharing propaganda from a website funded by the EU's regime-change arm the European Endowment for "Democracy."

We're supposed to believe the imperialist EU is funding "a properly anticolonial piece on Syria"
https://t.co/HrUE3vo7nD
To elite anti-anti-imperialist Cambridge gatekeeper @PriyamvadaGopal, Iran's post-colonial govt, which is suffocated by Western imperial aggression and sanctions, is little more than "Iranian theocrats"

Absurdly simplistic orientalist/neocolonial rhetoric
https://t.co/WpVGYfuO7L
Note how this anti-anti-imperialist Cambridge expert on "colonialism" @PriyamvadaGopal uses colonial rhetoric to refer to Iran's post-colonial gov't.

Would she ever call the US, UK, or France "regimes"? Because they're way more authoritarian and criminal
https://t.co/d493dcIRZ8
There's a reason @PriyamvadaGopal is allowed to be a Cambridge professor and teach the ruling class. She heroizes 19th and early 20th century anti-imperialists while smearing them today

She portrays China and Russia as neocolonial powers while whitewashing Western neocolonialism
Oh yeah, and let's not forget how anti-anti-imperialist Cambridge Professor @PriyamvadaGopal erased Palestinian anti-colonial resistance and whitewashed Zionism, because it was inconvenient to her liberal thesis.

@NumanAbdalWahid explains:
https://t.co/CjTPwzA5aX
Both pro-colonialist reactionary Douglas Murray and anti-anti-imperialist radlib @PriyamvadaGopal "have one essential thing in common. Both needed to elide crucial events to make the respective thesis in their books credible."

via @NumanAbdalWahid
https://t.co/yfWCZoegvR

More from Economy

Long rant: This @WSJ article bemoaning the decline of price theory is really worth highlighting. The economic theories and so called "laws of economics" that the WSJ consistently and religiously defends, are the source of their authority, power and privilege.


So called economic "theories" like "you get paid exactly what you are worth" and "markets are perfectly efficient" and "when wages rise, jobs fall" and "raising taxes on the rich kills jobs and growth" and "increasing justice decreases economic efficiency" and...

"Government intervention in markets always creates more harm than good" and "any regulation that constrains corporations kills growth and productivity", etc etc are effectively a protection racket for the rich. It is a set of internally consistent and mathematized conjectures...

That are all demonstrably nonsense. But getting people to accept these "theories" as laws of nature and immutable, timeless truths is the most effective way our current economic elites have found to maintain and enhance the status of the powerful and persuade the weak and poor...

to shut the fuck up and accept their lot in life. Now, FINALLY, some economists- are actually beginning to look at the real world evidence to determine whether these propositions actually describe anything real here on planet earth. Let me save you some time. The answer is NO.
It's always been detached, and it's always made the real economy worse.

[THREAD] 1/10


What is profit? It's excess labor.

You and your coworkers make a chair. Your boss sells that chair for more than he pays for the production of that chair and pockets the extra money.

So he pays you less than what he should and calls the unpaid labor he took "profit." 2/10

Well, the stock market adds a layer to that.

So now, when you work, it isn't just your boss that is siphoning off your excess labor but it is also all the shareholders.

There's a whole class of people who now rely on you to produce those chairs without fair compensation. 3/10

And in order to support these people, you and your coworkers need to up your productivity. More hours etc.

But Wall Street demands endless growth in order to keep the game going, so that's not enough.

So as your productivity increases, your relative wages suffer. 4/10

Not because the goods don't have value or because your labor is worth less. Often it's actually worth more because you've had to become incredibly productive in order to keep your job.

No, your wages suffer because there are so many people who need to profit from your work. 5/10

You May Also Like

1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”

Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?

A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:


2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to

- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal

3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:

Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.

Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.

4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?

To get clarity.

You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.

It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.

5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”

Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.