the existing social form¶

This somehow fundamentally misunderstands capital (which, by its very nature, cannot remain stagnant) AND underestimates the role of capitalist cultural hegemony in filtering every human interaction through the lens of maintaining the existing social form. https://t.co/KjFxcjIdf6 To be clear: non-monogamy is neither a prerequisite for revolutionary thought, nor does it inherently foster it. Same with every other social relation that doesn't perfectly conform to hegemony. You can be polyamorous and reactionary, you can be monogamous and revolutionary. In fact, wherever possible, modern liberal hegemony often prefers to assimilate nonconformity, rather than repress it. It's a useful tool for naturalizing the social form and deradicalizing what would otherwise be hyper-oppressed sectors of the working class. That's really the main conflict between conservatism and liberalism: whether to maintain hegemony through repression or assimilation.

Either way, the specific nature of the particular non-conformity is less relevant than you might think.