Many, many things have been said about AOC's dress at the Met and I feel like this guy from the Holding Fart meme not having said anything. So here goes nothing:

I think to these kind of discussions that split the left, there are often the same two angles: the pro and contra side of the question of how much personal responsibility the people have in bringing about the revolution or tax cuts or whatever the activism du jour may be. It's just an approximation and of course there are myriads of sub-camps to these two aspects. But let me explain the two ideas: the pro individual responsibility people say that AOC or Hasan buying a villa etc have some sort of personal responsibility to help the proletariat two whatever end is needed. You're not a good lefty if you don't personally contribute and even abdicate fun or 'the nice things' which often happen to be terrible in terms of environmental cost or even human cost like child labor for the newest T-shirt. And in a way, this is very intuitive, not last because when we, personally, think about it and ourselves, it might make sense. The anti responsibility crowd has a few facets. Of course there's the liberal one that just claims that you gotta live a little etc or that the slogan on a shirt helps to further the cause or that Hasan will be more able to stream from his villa. This is post-hoc justificationary nonsense. Of course it doesn't matter for the cause. A more interesting argument is that the pro individual responsibility arguments are Bourgeoisie in nature. Think about a more straightforward example: the people that always nag that you separate the trash or that you only go to vacation by plane once a year instead of twice or some of the sort. For a proper (I'm getting into the weeds here ...) leftist, it is often clear that that is a very liberal notion that hijacks our global WASP hegemony influenced feelings. "If you want to be rich, you just gotta work more, be more productive!" Or: "If you wanna save the planet, you should just separate the trash!" For me, it's difficult to abdicate this (I'm so protestant, it's hard to believe sometimes) but I do believe it's argumentative a bit strange to come from a personal responsibilities side here: I fly once or twice a year and another proletarian gives me shit about it, while some Bougie consultant flies thrice a week from Munich to Berlin and chuckles about us poor people arguing over it. In almost all regards, more than 50% up to 90% of resources used is used by like the top 1% or 10% or wherever you wanna cut your stats. Me not separating the trash or flying once instead of twice is not really gonna make a difference. I hate to write it, because it impinges on my own feelings but I think this nihilistic take might be the way to go. What has to happen is that we change society structurally, which is something revolutionaries and revisionists alike can stand behind. Taxing or abolishing the rich, both want to change structural stuff, not take me, Rael, personally, into account.

Now back to the dress: From the discussion above it seems clear that I advocate that it might not matter so much. Of course it's silly that it is discussed so far and wide but the actual matter of the thing that happened might be fine, AOC was fine to go there. What still leaves me a bit uneasy and eventually withdraw from the discussion is that I'm not sure what role a politician has. A private individual can't be called upon to carry the revolution. If you get the chance to have a nice thing, you should get it. A politician though, is not a private citizen. And maybe therefore should be held to a higher standard. Her shoosing up to the rich and powerful in an inconsequential fundraiser which is abused for money laundering and doesn't help anybody (even in the most liberal sense of the term) just seems contrary to all that she stands for. Maybe a small bit of protestantism is actually correct? I don't know.

Lastly, what disappoints me about the whole thing, regardless of whether the action in itself was morally good or bad is the following: I'm upset that political slogans have become a commodification. Just like the TV show about the best activism is strange, these few people wearing political slogans on their sleeves is strange. Not because I disagree with them (it's mostly uncontroversial, I think) but it has become a brand. "Tax the rich" shouldn't be brand. But at some point, Nike or whoever is gonna pop up and use it in their ad or whatever. We are so deep in Capitalist Realism that it is completely safe to appear in a dress like that. No one fears it, least of all the capitalists. Some people said that AOC was brave to wear it. But was she? I'm not sure. MLK was brave to say things that would get him shot. The Stonewall rebellion was brave, standing up against the oppression. AOC, deep inside electoralism, wearing a mildly controversial dress, seems only a bit better than milquetoast. But I hope she had a fun night, as the 31 year old private person she is, sincerely.