I told y'all you weren't ready for this, lol.

The most common response I'm getting is: "scientists aren't bourgeois because they don't own the means of production."

Everyone arguing this point is clearly more interested in linguistics than they are actual material analysis. https://twitter.com/Anarch_King/status/1388164218139066372

There are multiple definitions of the term "bourgeois." The left most commonly adopts the Marxist definition "owning the means of production" and reject the more widely accepted definition of "wealthy or upper/middle class." We do so in order to specify the problem of Capitalism.

That being said, if you genuinely believe those who are wealthy or upper/middle class & do not own any capital have the same interests as other more impoverished working class people, you're just delusional.

Anyone who's comfortable has the interest of maintaining that comfort.

We call these economically comfortable people the "middle class" even though they are having their labor exploited by those who own Capital. They are *technically* working class, but despite that they're perfectly comfortable the way things are and would like to keep it that way.

We are never going to win over these people. They aren't experiencing any adverse effects of the oppressive system of Capitalism, and their material interests incentivize them to maintain the status quo. Considering them "working class" based on a technicality is ridiculous.

My point in all of this is to make those of you sending me literal death threats (not even exaggerating, had to report a couple of you, some of y'all are fucking nuts) over this linguistic technicality realize just how petty and ridiculous your argument is.

The scientific community is bourgeois in the sense that they are generally wealthy or upper/middle class privileged white people who are funded entirely by Capitalist institutions to increase corporate profits and maintain the white supremacist imperialist institutions.

I'm making a material analysis of the scientific community and scientific institutions. The more you wish to belabor the notion that the scientific community isn't *technically* bourgeois, the more you distract from that important materialist critique.