According to the moral code advanced by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other redistributionists of the left, is it morally acceptable for some people to have way more social influence and fame than others?
Take Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, for example. She possesses a level of charisma and social-media savvy that a lot of other people don't, and she exploits these talents to maximum advantage while others of greater merit remain relatively obscure. She has shot to social-stardom levels in a short period of time even though the public could barely name even the most prominent philosophers alive who've put in years of hard intellectual work. How many of AOC's zillions of twitter followers have even heard of Kripke, Chalmers, Williamson, et al, much less the philosophers who do partake in social media (namely in longer-form, more thought-intensive blogging)? Philosophers are way more thoughtful and learned than AOC (and their blogs way less toxic than her twitter feed), so why don't they get the attention she does?
Social influence is a highly valued and sought after thing, much like money/wealth. Shouldn't AOC feel guilty and be willing to have her social influence redistributed to the less fortunate?
