https://mastodon.social/@UP8/114860542662347802
Marxism is a complex system that appeals to systematizers, "anti-racism" is a little less smart and more pessimistic and has about as much appeal to noneducated minorities as Marxism has to the working class -- the rank and file's ideology is more like
https://mastodon.social/@UP8/112503020931163144
A lot of it is path dependent. I mean, Trump greased the skids for those mRNA vaccines and I remember my leftist friends saying in December 2020 that there must be something wrong about them being developed at "warp speed". Had he won it would have been leftists shunning vaccines and rightists shunning them for being stupid.
Every good paranoid believes the "pincer theory" that every social movement needs a wing that appeals to the elite (lacks manpower) and mass (lacks resources, vision, ...) to the smart and the stupid, etc.
My erstwhile understanding of the earlier appeal of Marxism was that it was fully compatible with the Weberian work ethic-- right until someone found a way to work the famous laziness of the Russians into propaganda.
Now that you mention it. Simplicity can appeal to the elites as a standin for "marketability to the masses". Helps the Kessel Run. (Pincer)
(That Mormons are a significant deal in the USG hiring pipeline is not a symptom of right wing sophistication-- unless one is a conspiracy theorist)
The business cycle model of yours might have be fully understandable within cybernetics, especially in the time series respect. But are we not also interested in competing/interacting "peer" systems "beyond mean field"? How Apple and Desktop Linux gained ground against MSoft by reducing fragmentation, how MSoft responded by diversifying. You might have other examples for and against?