[Caution, leftist infighting/snide remarks below]
spoiler
I’m confused, doesn’t worsening material conditions count as political utility in his eyes?
Edit:I normally wouldn’t have an issue, since it’s actually pretty sane, but I literally thought to myself today “it would be funny if BE said Kirk’s death was a bad thing because adventurism will make things worse.” I was joking. I’m starting to hypothosize that economists [both accelerationist and reformists] are actually simps for the status quo
This is a completely unmaterialist take. This has absolutely 0 material effect on the situation. Stronger grounds to do what they wanted in the eyes of whom? Libs who werent gonna do shit either way? Conservative who were gonna eat up whatever they say regardless? Genuinely what is materially affected? This is a position based on the vibes of what sounds like should be true, not a realistic material analysis of the situation