I really wanted to support your response because I agree that saying “all rich people lose their humanity” is ridiculous and over-generalizes reality.
However, you then proceed to counter umair’s over-generalizations by marching out plenty of your own:
“leftist institutions that continue to push an idea…”
“Sadly, these professors will look at a success like this and condemn it.”
“…create his own company in his mid-20s making more money than the pseudo-intellectuals in academia.”
“not every person is actually meant for college (even if they mostly teach social justice related courses these days)”
“[Zuckerburg and Pelosi] want to implement policies that destroy a system that allows even the lower income to become successful”
“inner-city or social justice mentality. Nowadays, the father might say, “See that man! I wonder who he stepped on to get where he is?!”
Are some of the above statements partially true? Sure. But they are not universally true (and in some cases, not even close). There’s a lot to disagree with in umair’s article, but criticizing his lack of appreciation for nuance with talking points that also fail to appreciate nuance sort of defeats the purpose.
