A.R. Moxon+ Your Authors @JuliusGoat Long past the age of maturity Author of THE REVISIONARIES Order: tinyurl.com/vdeohor Newsletter: tinyletter.com/ARMoxon He/him. Repped by @samroebuck Nov. 08, 2019 2 min read + Your Authors

Billionaires weighing in against Warren/Sanders and getting into the race as spoilers isn't an indication that billionaires think a progressive message wouldn't beat Trump, but rather that they think it can.

We all get that, right?

Billionaires and their surrogates out there saying the "let's tax billionaires" movement is dangerous. They say it's because it *can't* win.

But not being able to win wouldn't make it dangerous to billionaires. You don't fear the caged tiger.

It can absolutely win.

The pro-billionaire perspective is pretty obviously, "oh shit this thing could win."

Running a stable pro-billionaire candidate against an unstable pro-billionaire candidate is their clear preference.

Because then they won't care who wins.

We're all clear on this, right?

The reason the donor class wants Biden to be the nominee has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not they think he's electable. Can he win? Maybe. Maybe not. Who cares? Not them.

Pro-billionaire vs. pro-billionaire = win.

We all realize this, right?

Now obviously *you or I* might care which wins, because Trump is an authoritarian freak who endangers us all and a bigot who empowers bigots.

But billionaires won't care.

What they fear is an anti-billionaire platform.

And they don't fear it because they think it will *lose*.

Billionaires have resources to conduct very accurate risk-assessments, and they clearly see a Warren or Sanders presidency as a *massive* risk ... of winning.

They also have resources to produce propaganda convincing us the opposite is true.

Tell me we're all clear on this.

Here's what I am saying about this "feasibility" argument:

Billionaires clearly see it as a feasible threat.

Take that for what you will.

I guess my conclusion is that even if your ONLY priority is to win the presidency away from Trump, there is a message that billionaires sure seem to think will win, based on the extent they're going to prevent it, and you'd probably do well to put your energy behind it.

Again, this is a pro-billionaire candidate delivering ostensibly anti-billionaire rhetoric that actually favors billionaires.

Billionaires are co-opting the anti-billionaire message. That's an indication they think an anti-billionaire message can win.

"Anti-billionaire" doesn't mean "only some people should get access to public goods."

That's the billionaire's game. They win that game, and they'd love us to play it against them.

"Anti-billionaire" means "all these public goods are citizenship rights available to EVERYONE."

To say "we won't invest in public goods because *billionaires* will use them, too" is a pro-billionaire message.

Again: it is a *pro* billionaire message. They don't care about benefiting from public good. They care about not paying taxes.

We're all interconnected and interdependent on one another. Government is how we manage that fact.

Billionaires wish to become immune to any responsibilities to that fact through wealth. They call any attempt to force them to acknowledge that fact "class war."

They call it war.

You can follow @JuliusGoat.


Tip: mention @threader_app on a Twitter thread with the keyword “compile” to get a link to it.

Enjoy Threader? Sign up.

Since you’re here...

... we’re asking visitors like you to make a contribution to support this independent project. In these uncertain times, access to information is vital. Threader gets 1,000,000+ visits a month and our iOS Twitter client was featured as an App of the Day by Apple. Your financial support will help two developers to keep working on this app. Everyone’s contribution, big or small, is so valuable. Support Threader by becoming premium or by donating on PayPal. Thank you.