elon musk, mark zuckerberg, J.K rowling! Are the names that come to mind.

3 from different background: a African immigrant benefiting from government spending, an American smart young engineer, and a female English successful writer.

They are no politicians, and cant be accuse of trying to gather some vote. Multi-billions amongst them.

I get they lean to the right to protect their cash, with less tax and regulation. I get they are racist because they fear some poor people will take their cash.

But why the hatred for trans people ? It’s 1% of the population, they cant do anything, dont threaten anyone. There is no rational or psychological reason

*EDIT: I read all the comments. A lot of interesting explanation: smokescreen/scapegoat, maintaining the male/female power structure, new face of anti-gay , projection / self-hatred , just louder voice …

I realize, may be, I didn’t post a good question. May be it is less about the ultra-rich but more about why that rhetoric work on the general population (else it would not have taken hold as it does). For that I have a 2 cent theory: The raise of the cult of Nature we have since the global warming. The idea, that everything natural is better. The ugly version is only natural male and female are worthy*

  • prototype_g2@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    6 days ago

    It is a useful distraction from the surplus value extraction from the proletariat to the bourgeoisie.

    The Bourgeoisie hire workers and pay them for their work. But with what money? The money made by selling a product or service. But who did the work to create said product or service? The workers did. So workers do work, which makes money for the company. But do the workers receive all of it? After all, they did all the work. But no, no they don’t. If the Bourgeoisie gave all the money the workers to back to the workers, them how could the Bourgeoisie make a profit? It thereby must follow that the Bourgeoisie pay their workers less than the value they produce, thereby stealing that money from the workers.

    You might say “but the bourgeoisie own the company! And they also do some work themselves! Some people’s work just contributes more than others.” Yeah, yeah, but who gets to decide how much of the pie each person gets? How much should be reinvested and what not? Who gets to decide what is done with the money made? The Bourgeoisie! But why them? Why do the workers not have a say in how the money they made is used? Because the Bourgeoisie had enough money to buy the means necessary to make money (the factories, infrastructure or whatever) and the workers did not. How did the Bourgeoisie get all that money you ask? By stealing worker’s wages.


    What does this have to do with trans people?

    1. All it takes for evil to prevail is for good people to do nothing.

    This whole anti-trans thing is a useful distraction. Bad people will believe it’s those dam trans people’s fault their country is shit and not investigate any further. Good people will be distracted arguing against the bad people on why being trans isn’t evil, all the while the real culprits laugh as we fight each other.

    Remember: Desperate people make great workers and distracted citizens. Keep people busy with basic necessities and they won’t have time or energy to realize who is really exploiting them.

    1. It makes trans folk more exploitable

    Racism a misogyny is useful for the Bourgeoisie as it allows them to pay lower wages. The bourgeoisie want to pay their workers a little as possible. Desperate jobless people are more willing to take a bad deal because any job is better than homelessness. That means the more desperate people there are, the lower the wages they can pay, as they can replace workers who demand a higher wage with workers from this reserve.

    Racism keeps people of color in poverty allowing them to be more easily exploited. Misogyny justifies paying women half the wage of a man, which is exactly what the Bourgeoisie want.

    Likewise, if trans folk are illegalized that will make it hard for them to find a job, adding even more people to the reverse army of labour.

    • f4f4f4f4f4f4f4f4@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 days ago

      The US right-wing was constantly bitching about “cancel culture” and now that they are in power they are cancelling everything they can.

  • inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    All threaten the oldest hierarchy of all: man over woman.

    As for musk, he has a trans child he hates and disowned. And he’s a Nazi, straight up. Family left Canada to go to apartheid South Africa because they agreed with apartheid and white racial supremacy. See the hierarchy here?

    Zuck is an opportunist who will align with anything that makes him money. But he also has a weird obsession with Roman history that’s a red flag to me about being a closet fascist.

    Jk Rowling is a second wave feminist and she’s big mad that people without vaginas can call themselves women and be in women’s spaces.

    • Alice@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      7 days ago

      All threaten the oldest hierarchy of all: man over woman.

      Pretty much this. I remember being a teenager and hearing the most basic watered-down gender theory and being really confused and upset. Even back then I knew it was because, for it to be true, it meant a lot of things I take for granted about society were actually totally irrelevant. Unfortunately some people don’t ever have to confront their cognitive dissonance, they just use their money and power to enforce the status quo they’re used to.

      Jk Rowling is a second wave feminist and she’s big mad that people without vaginas can call themselves women and be in women’s spaces.

      Unfortunately you could have the best neo-vagina money could buy and terfs would still find an excuse to exclude you. It’s not truly about genitalia, it’s about being trans.

    • ooli2@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      so 3 different agenda, with the same result. Probably it is as coincidental as that

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    6 days ago

    Its alla diversion.

    Find some group that is different, then shit on them and make them look bad publicly while this relatively small group can’t so much to talk back publicly.

    It’ll outrage the public, they’ll start looking at the group while trump and Co then go and rob the state blind while no one is looking

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 days ago

      Yep.

      To add to that, I’ve found a lot of people in the working class care a lot about class differentiators and will spend a lot of time trying to profess how they should be viewed at a higher relative ranking since they can’t rely on money or heritage to do it for them.

      So, if you create an out group for them, a lot of them will latch on to that idea since it raises their relative value in a meaningful way.

  • kibiz0r@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    7 days ago

    They are frequently interviewed.

    Which means they are frequently asked: “Why’s everything fucked up?”

    They can’t give the real answer, which is “ultra-rich people”.

    So they give no answer at all (in which case you don’t hear about it) or they cite the Enemy Of The Day.

    • ooli2@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      I get it. But that smokescreen is achieved with anti-immigrant rhetoric. Throwing Trans in , seems so random

      • Sl00k@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 days ago

        This smoke screen around LGBTQ+ and anti immigration has been stoked for nearly 30 years in order to veer away from the actual discussion and laws around wealth inequality, healthcare, etc. It’s all a guise against minority groups who can’t fight back. Sometimes positive sometimes negative, but at the end of the day billionaires stoke the fear around these minority groups and they get to keep growing their billions without restriction.

      • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 days ago

        The rhetoric against immigrants serves as a more general purpose blaming scheme. Economy bad because immigrants. You’re unemployed because immigrants. Crime because immigrants. Your bad grades are immigrants.

        LGBTQ+ rights have always been a contentious point because it has always worked incredibly well for diverting attention on all sides, especially the media. The right always paints them as these depraved monsters that will convert children into gay communist sex on schools, which is a “threat” that’s “up close and personal”

      • papertowels@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 days ago

        Reality has a left leaning bias. Immigrants have largely become normalized, so they need something else to scrape goat.

  • golden_zealot@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    They will pick whatever group they think will suddenly put as many idiots as possible under their control when they say “GROUP A IS BAD”.

    Most of them don’t care they are trans, they only care that they can take advantage of the oppression of a minority group in order to consolidate control over people so that they can oppress more people.

    When everyone alive and dead is either oppressed or under your control, you become god. This is the goal, but they don’t care about the process to get there.

  • tootoughtoremember@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Just the latest social group that’s still broadly acceptable to shit on.

    There’s not a ton of global census data out there, but in Canada trans and non-binary people make up 0.33% of the population. Which means there’s a lot of people who don’t know anyone who is trans or non-binary. Unfortunately there’s also a lot of people who are unwilling to emphasize, or even sympathize, for those they feel are different or strange to them. It take time and effort to listen to others’ stories and to gain appreciation for their perspective, and it’s an effort many people are uncomfortable making if it feels they are deviating too far from society’s norm. What you’re observing is those in power taking advantage of the same human weakness that’s been used forever to discriminate on whoever the current permissible outgroup to hate is.

    How many times have you heard, “I don’t care about anyone being/doing Y, but…”, and then proceed to say some sort of transphobic, homophobic, racist, or sexist shit? When I grew up it was the G in LGBT. When my parents grew up it was African Americans. Women only got the right to vote a century ago, you better believe some of our great granduncles had some shit to say that would make today’s uncles look like saints.

  • daggermoon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    6 days ago
    1. They’re a scapegoat
    2. People fear what they don’t understand. If they actually went out and talked to trans people they may realize they’re normal people just like anyone else.
  • fluxion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    7 days ago

    Poor, trans, minorities, leftists, educated, and even moderate Republicans are all under attack. These billionaires participate so they can be part of the fascist takeover of this country, not through any personal conviction.

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Also, societal attitudes have changed to the point where at least open racism or homophobia aren’t really acceptable any more. So they needed a new scapegoat.

  • 小莱卡@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    they’re the newest scapegoat, the bourgeoisie always need a scapegoat to redirect the other classes grievances to them.

  • DinosaurThussy [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    7 days ago

    The reasons generally start out personal and become generalized as a political “position”, which really consumes your life after a while.

    Rowling has said that she had a queer “phase” and that if she were going through that nowadays, she would likely have ended up considering herself trans (incorrectly, by her assertion). That reads to me as some internalized bigotry that she never worked through. Musk has a daughter who’s a trans woman and disowned him for being a piece of shit. He started posting about “pronouns” soon after. And Zuckerberg seems to have seen the way the winds are blowing with the current administration and jumped on the anti-trans bandwagon because he’s a lizard man with no soul (metaphorically, not in the David Icke antisemitic way). These are all guesses, but not based on nothing.

    It ends up being socially unacceptable to say, “trans people remind me of my estranged daughter so I don’t like them,” and rightly so. So you have to retreat and bury the context, taking it up as a matter of principle. And your mind can backfill the justification over and over again, further cementing the ideas as people start to ask you to talk about trans people over and over again. After all, you’re a public figure who doesn’t like trans people. That’s a hot topic. People on Twitter want to talk about it. Reporters want to talk about it. So it snowballs from there. Transphobia can absolutely take over the life of a public figure.

    Philosophy Tube has an excellent video on something called phantasms and how people get stuck in irrational worldviews. Would recommend.

    • ooli2@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 days ago

      astute observation. Zuckerberg with all his new 'masculine energy" stuff, could still fit in your approach: he dont accept his woman side

  • purplemeowanon@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    6 days ago

    A useful distraction to prevent class warfare and protect their wealth with a convenient and reliable scapegoat designed to ensure a divided working class.