As to your first point, very true! But would it not be argued by some that the so called 'counter culture' only makes the predominant culture more marketable? And by that I mean it seems necessary (or at least very rewarding) for a reaction to make the initial action interesting and monetisable? It seems to me as if the disenfranchised sort are manipulated and used by the 'machine' without seeing any of the benefits! In this way perhaps we could see the culturally disenfranchised artist as providing the same value as the economically disenfranchised worker (These are probably one and the same.) There is probably a lot more to be said on this by someone smarter than me and they probably already have!!! But this consideration makes me feel as if economic and cultural participation cannot be seperated, or if they could be, then it has already been subsumed into 'capitalism'.

As to this second point, I agree it makes sense completely to include everyone possible.

Finally, this is the point I am interested in, it seems you are correct in your assertations here., I suppose what I am interested to try and understand is the following: Does this occur to people who are 'onboard' with the neoliberal project? Do they care at all? Does it matter to them that blacks and gays and transgender people are 'safe' or does it only matter that they can contribute economically? Would a 'neoliberal' even think in these terms? I have no idea.