GenX leftists think every problem in the world is caused by "corporations" and if you think any given problem is not caused by "corporations" they will assume you're lying. It goes beyond believing in conspiracy theories; they're literally incapable of believing in something /unless/ it's a conspiracy theory.
Most recent examples being "climate change is caused by 100 companies" and "housing prices are caused by BlackRock" which are both entirely fictional.
(There is an obvious rightist equivalent of this which has historically caused a lot more problems.)
This is the issue with all populist ideologies, where there is one monolithic boogieman that explains all ills. The real world just doesn't work like that. It's an interesting case study into confirmation bias and bad quality thinking, I guess.
Nice 2016 populism boogieman: completely broad-strokes it’s-all-the-same statements with no arguments at all. Do you see the irony and/or hypocrisy here?
Yes, I will say it: all these 2016 populism blanket statements are equally monolithic and devoid of convincing points, just fodder for your own particular echo chamber.
I was describing reality, not making an "argument". Any prescription that follows from my description is an exercise for the reader. And my description was to outline an abstraction, not to say that all child-class characteristics are the same across all instances, which they obviously aren't.
Letter from the President and Prime Minister Mossadegh on the Oil Situation and the Problem of Aid to Iran dated July 9, 1953 (emphasis added) [1]:
> It was primarily because of that hope that the United States Government during the last two years has made earnest efforts to assist in eliminating certain differences between Iran and the United Kingdom which have arisen as a result of the nationalization of the Iranian oil industry. It has been the belief of the United States that the reaching of an agreement in the matter of compensation would strengthen confidence throughout the world in the determination of Iran fully to adhere to the principles which render possible a harmonious community of free nations; that it would contribute to the strengthening of the international credit standing of Iran; and that it would lead to the solution of some of the financial and economic problems at present facing Iran.
Effect on National Security Interests in Latin America of Possible Anti-Trust Proceedings, June 1, 1953 [2]:
> Elsewhere in Central America, institution of the action would greatly stimulate movements to nationalize the properties of the Company. Such nationalization is now threatened to some degree in all countries in which the Company operates, particularly in Costa Rica through the possible accession to the presidency of Jose Figueres, who is not a Communist but is openly speaking of nationalization. To the extent such nationalization is achieved, it would not only affect a private company, but would have direct and far-reaching repercussions on our strategic position.
National Intelligent Estimate: CHILE: THE ALTERNATIVES FACING THE ALLENDE REGIME, June 29, 1972 [3]:
> n the basis of the record so far, Chile’s future course remains to a large extent an open issue. To be sure, the regime carried out a substantial part of its program during its first year, particularly in the economic area. With little effective opposition—indeed, in many cases with a broad consensus—Allende nationalized key economic sectors, redistributed income in favor of the poorer classes, and accelerated land expropriation.
Most recent examples being "climate change is caused by 100 companies" and "housing prices are caused by BlackRock" which are both entirely fictional.
(There is an obvious rightist equivalent of this which has historically caused a lot more problems.)