The bourgeoisie in my country have pushed the euphemism of “working capital” as something that needs protection from wealth tax. By inseparably connecting capital with jobs, they push the narrative that you cannot tax wealth without removing jobs and consequently hurting the working class. They paid for research groups to prove this connection, but what their research actually showed was that wealth tax creates jobs due to incentivizing keeping profits within the companies they own. The audacity to think owning the means of production is a privilege they should enjoy special treatment to keep is beyond me, but even so, this type of rhetoric keeps gaining ground.

What is the propaganda they are pushing on you, and how can socialist policies prevail if reason loses to made up words changing the narrative?

  • @vzq
    link
    288 months ago

    The entire managing class peddles euphemisms for a living, and has done so for generations.

    My favorite remains “Human Resources”.

    • @Urist@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      78 months ago

      Got to love how they are abusing the power asymmetry and still make it out to be that the system is implemented to help us.

      • @Urist@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        18 months ago

        Not quite sure I understand the connotations of this one fully. Could you explain it a little for me?

        • @floofloof@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          48 months ago

          I see the common reference to working people as “consumers” as emphasizing their role as passive recipients of goods and services who serve primarily to put money into the capitalist system. To call people consumers de-emphasizes and obscures these same people’s role as the producers of value, suggesting that value is produced elsewhere.