What was the context of this point of his?
The original link to the topic of the thread was TDA saying that many "social justice warriors" were full-blown communists, to which I replied, no, they are liberals and these are completely different ideas. This led to somewhat of an inquisition, though fortunately not including actual torture. Had the same discussion occurred on Wikipediocracy, where Zoloft is definitely a male member, the controversy would have been completely different as Wikipediocracy like Wikipedia is stridently liberal in outlook. Self-described "socialists" have slavishly carried liberals' water for decades now, so calling oneself a communist (I believe Carrite calls himself a Marxist) is viewed as harmless and wouldn't likely be cause for a purge, but dissent on the so-called "cultural issues" is vigorously suppressed.
This illustrates what I was saying to begin with, that in practice it's not economic equality which motivates them and in fact they oppose it, but there's no need for them to say so so long as "socialists" back them on the issues that they do care about without causing trouble. In the long run, the destruction of the family and hence community is a bigger gift to capitalism than one might have reasonably hoped for, since there is no organizing principle left standing besides money. Thus the world, in their view, is finally fair.
See, isn't this inspirational?
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/03/busi ... e-him.html
Gay, latino and tech, hooray! Especially funny how this makes a Goldman Sachs chief an honorary non-plutocrat. You get a sense of how this religion works and whom it serves.