The Faux Humility of The Temporarily Embarrassed Millionaire Left
“I am trash,” the Leftist says. “I have no talent,” he continues, “What do I know? Who am I to make any definitive claims?”
When a Leftist attempts to push their views, these types of things are often said. Where the Infantile Sickness, Leftism, has sway, competence and confidence are often considered ideological signals that someone isn’t “good.”
But many who champion anti-authority and anti-institutional sentiments harbor a deep-seated belief that they are merely “temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” Eventually, if they work hard enough, they will ascend to wealth and power! This belies a narcissism in which it is clear they consider themselves special, able to beat all of the institutional barriers they endlessly talk about (without knowing what “system” actually even means).
To mask this contradiction, both to themselves and others, they employ a strategy of faux humbleness.
Temporarily Embarrassed Millionaires
The concept of the “temporarily embarrassed millionaire” has deep roots in American culture, reflecting a pervasive belief in social and economic mobility. This idea is rooted in the myth of the American Dream — the belief that anyone, regardless of their current situation, has the potential to achieve wealth and power through hard work and determination. It’s been a cornerstone of American ideology since the early days of the nation, reinforcing the idea that the United States is a land of opportunity.
And, ideally, it would be. Work should be rewarded in its full value; it’s that simple. Work should be so worthwhile that it is life’s prime want! However, this isn’t the way things currently work.
The term “temporarily embarrassed millionaire” itself is often attributed to the American author John Steinbeck, who noted this phenomenon during the Great Depression. Steinbeck observed that many Americans, despite facing severe economic hardships, continued to support policies that favored the wealthy because they saw themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires — people who were momentarily down on their luck but destined for future prosperity.
This mindset persists today, influencing people to support systems and structures that perpetuate class rule under the assumption that they will one day benefit from these systems. The sense of individualism and personal responsibility at the core obscures the systemic barriers that prevent true economic mobility for most people.
Among leftists, this mindset manifests in a unique way. While outwardly criticizing elite power structures and advocating for radical change, many harbor aspirations of personal success within these very systems. This internal contradiction is often masked by a performance of humility — faux humbleness — that helps them avoid appearing hypocritical.
Leftism, Envy, and Faux Humility
Faux humbleness is a strategic facade adopted by those who wish to reconcile their outwardly radical stances with their inward aspirations for success within the very systems they critique. This is particularly evident among leftists who harbor a form of narcissistic envy — a deep-seated resentment towards those in positions of power and privilege, coupled with a covert desire to attain similar status.
This kind of envy encapsulates a complex mix of emotions: resentment towards those who possess what one desires, coupled with a secret longing to acquire those very attributes or positions, often along with an overestimation of one’s abilities. While this psychological state is not universal among leftists, it is particularly prevalent among those who present themselves as piously left. These individuals often portray themselves as overly humble and self-effacing to mask their underlying aspirations and envy.
Contrapoints’ video, “Envy,” incorrectly (and I think intentionally so) attributes envy as the motive for radical leftism – which she, again, incorrectly groups Marxism into. This view misunderstands the materialist foundations of Marxist thought, which focuses on systemic structures and historical necessity rather than individual moral failings.
Leftism, in contrast to Marxism, is ultimately a bourgeois ideology (this is the basis of my upcoming documentary, that left and right are ideological support of capitalism). Leftism offers a way for individuals to feel counter-cultural and radical without truly threatening (in many cases, also fully working to protect) the power structures they purport to critique. It provides a superficial critique of power, it often reinforces the status quo by allowing individuals to signal their virtue without enacting substantial change.
We see this in the desperate attempts to protect intellectual property law following Hbomberguy’s Plagiarism and You(Tube) video. The narcissistic envy on display, the elitism of being a “real" artist, creator, filmmaker, etc., while simultaneously operating a “struggling small business” (that often amounts to a hobby). The mindset of “I must own value-generating property” permeates everything they say and do, and despite their critiques, they clearly don’t just participate in but believe in the system they claim to hate. Their skill makes them better than other people, and they belong at the top (there’s that Platonic bullshit!).
To mask this internal contradiction, leftists engage in performative humility. By downplaying their own talents, achievements, and ambitions, they create an image of themselves as modest and relatable. They overemphasize their struggles and defects of character to distance them from accusations of elitism or hypocrisy, hoping to make their radical rhetoric appear more genuine and authentic.
This performative humility is not merely an interpersonal tactic but a way to maintain their ideological stance without jeopardizing future opportunities. By appearing humble and unassuming, they avoid scrutiny and criticism, preserving their potential to succeed within the systems they ostensibly oppose.
Moreover, while leftism appeals to genuine individuals for its purported goals of equality and justice, it attracts some very cynical individuals. These types often signal their allegiance more fervently, believing that by doing so, they can appear “better” than others and progress within these leftist social structures.
Why do liberals/leftists “get more conservative as they get older?” Because they gamed their way to some degree of success through the connections they built with these tactics, or they become resentful that they don’t.
The Impact on Leftist Movements
Obviously, these mentalities dilute the genuine critique of power structures (and any action that may come from the identification of contradiction), replacing it with performative modesty that fails to challenge the status quo. It creates a culture where individuals are encouraged to downplay their aspirations and achievements (which should not be seen as automatically harmful), leading to a lack of genuine action against systemic issues.
Leftism, by focusing on sets of ideological beliefs rather than material conditions and class power, becomes susceptible to exploitation by cynical actors. These individuals can weaponize the ideology, signaling harder or pointing out some lack of purity against genuine participants to gain power within the movement. This dynamic is particularly dangerous today, where fandom and lifestyle marketing are prevalent.
Leftist environments generally ape fandom, where identity and community are commodified, making it easier for cynical actors to manipulate these elements for personal gain. Ideological signaling is a tool for social climbing, not a means for genuine critique and action against oppressive systems. The emphasis on performative humility allows these actors to appear more genuine and relatable. At the same time, those who actually critique and challenge power structures may be seen as contrarian (or worse, fascist!).
This environment fosters a culture of competition and one-upmanship, where individuals are more concerned with appearing virtuous than with addressing the root causes of inequality and oppression. The narcissistic envy mindset, coupled with the temporarily embarrassed millionaire mentality, ensures that the movement remains fragmented and unable to mount a cohesive challenge to existing power structures.
Conclusion
While leftism purports to challenge power structures and advocate for radical change, these ideologies are often utilized by individuals whose aspirations are aligned with the very systems they critique. A performative humility, driven by narcissistic envy, undermines genuine efforts to address systemic issues, fostering an environment where ideological signaling replaces substantive action.
Leftism, as a bourgeois ideology, provides a comfortable space for individuals to feel countercultural without truly threatening the status quo. This focus on sets of beliefs rather than material conditions and class contradictions not only enables cynical actors to exploit the ideology for personal gain but also devastates the potential for real change.
The result is a fragmented movement, primarily concerned with maintaining appearances and internal competition. Genuine critiques are often overshadowed by performative modesty, and those who truly seek to change things are marginalized.