I see a bunch of people in this thread picking bones with Yanis’ word usage.

I upvoted the best of those that are simple, straightforward, and focus on what they want instead of what they don’t.

The legit way to go negative is to demonstrate real tangible harm, and not just tell me you don’t like it. You don’t like the word? Well boo fucking hoo your little boo boo. Everyone likes or dislikes all sorts of things. Why should I care about this particular dislike of yours? Why is it important? Convince me.

I see Yanis Varoufakis as an ally. He’s making great points. Are the points new? Who gives a shit? I don’t. Is he convincing new people every day? Yes, he is. Is he opening and helping align new minds every day? No shit. Yes. Absolutely. Is he eloquent, clear, and persuasive? Yes, yes, yes. And that’s what matters.

I will upvote Yanis as long as he keeps being the Yanis that I know and like. I know what he is going to say. And that’s fine. It’s like if Ricardo Semler were giving a new talk I could guess the content. If Richard Wolff says something new, I can guess the general gist of what it is. That doesn’t make it wrong or bad. There are still folks out there who need to hear it. New people are born every day. Every day is someone’s first time.

The bigger reason Yanis is popular is because he served in an important government post in Greece. And he is right. That helps too. No need to produce useless unproductive friction toward Yanis. (“Oh, but his taxonomy is not to my liking!” holy batman what a low value comment)

I myself use all these words: neofeudalism, economic royalists, oligarchs, fascists, cappies, wealth consolidationists, private property fetishists, free market fundamentalists, libertarians, etc. There is not just one legit way to describe that evil. The point is to oppose the wealth and economic decision consolidation and to oppose the erosion of the commons. That’s it.