59
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2023
59 points (100.0% liked)
World News
22057 readers
99 users here now
Breaking news from around the world.
News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
For US News, see the US News community.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Eh. Billionaires are each directly responsible for meteoric contributions to human suffering and loss of life. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to dismiss the humanity of folks who actively devalue the humanity of the vast majority of humans. Eat the rich.
I think it's unreasonable and a huge generalization. Tell me what the 19 year old billionaires son did to contribute to human suffering.
I appreciate your voice and the importance of the sentiment that all humans deserve fundamental dignity and respect.
That said, “all billionaires are malfeasant parasites who don’t deserve to participate in society” is a hill upon which I’m willing to die.
It takes a special kind of sociopathy to pillage and hoard resources unfathomable when people are starving, suffering, and dying.
“Eat the rich” is more stirring and concise than “humanely strip the heinously wealthy of their power and resources”.
I wish you'd own your point of view instead of using weasel words. Do you support the respect and dignity of all people or not?
Preemptive edit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word
Your first sentence is incomprehensible to me.
What I mean is that I logically it’s very good to have people who are passionate about honoring human respect and dignity. It’s more moral and closer to the kindest world we could have. A diversity of opinions is necessary and first, and foremost, I wanted to recognize and respect the good work of voicing a less popular opinion to uphold your virtues.
Personally, I’m more worried about the collective pain and suffering that could be avoided if the status quo is maintained than quickly taking action and inadvertently breaking eggs. IMHO, the main reason sociopaths prevail is that empathetic folks waste time and effort trying to find a fantasy path where no one is hurt. Seems to me like the focus should be efficient and effective resolution of societal issues generating mass suffering period rather than having an Entmoot.
We’re not going to be able to impress billionaires so much with kindness and consideration that they prioritize the greater good over short-term interests. Better is the enemy of done.
My viewpoint is that we need to prioritize the reducing the most suffering yesterday. you don’t have to and probably shouldn’t agree. Discussion and disagreement are necessary for coalescing on a good path forward. Better ideas come out of a composite of values, flat personal opinions.
Tl;dr - I think your ideals are good and right in an ideal world, but also think the sentiment has misplaced priorities in the nightmare unfolding with exponential consumption of resources and pollution of the planet. I’m grateful for the opportunity to discuss and this is a nice change of pace/tone from Reddit.