Comment on Feelin free
voxthefox@lemmy.world 6 days agoI can imagine by some stretch you can still blame the rich, maybe without the rich people they’d have more access to better farmland, cheap water, etc.
Lol, so desperate to be the victim of an imaginary rich person that you don’t even understand that it universally takes work to do things like eat food.
How do you think people got food 10,000 years ago? Or 30,000?
Do you think being a hunter-gatherer society is a vacation? Who were the rich people before money was invented that apparently caused things like drought?
The kind of comments I’m reading here explain a lot of why Dems lost the election
They are willfully disconnected from the reality of their fellow Americans
They don’t see it
I know, right?
ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 6 days ago
If you want to simplify the thought experiment, imagine being the only person in existence. You would still need to struggle just to meet the basic needs of survival, but you would definitely not be oppressed.
HauntedCupcake@lemmy.world 6 days ago
Nature is as oppressive as billionaires. Working together helps overcome that, both when combatting nature and the asset class
ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 6 days ago
I think that those are different meanings of the word “oppressive”, which has a moral component when referring to human actions but not when referring to natural phenomena.
Imagine the following scenarios:
You’re alone on the planet. You struggle to survive.
Now there’s a wealthy person on the other side of the planet, where his lifestyle has no effect on you. He could rescue you but he chooses not to.
The wealthy person offers to rescue you on the condition that you must work for him. He would get most of the products of your labor but survival would still be easier than it was when you were alone.
Now you have no choice except to accept the wealthy person’s offer. Survival is still easier than it would be if you were alone, but there isn’t anywhere left where you could survive alone.
Your life is oppressive in each of these scenarios in the sense that simply surviving is difficult and there’s no possibility of improvement. However, there’s clearly no moral component to that in (1) because you are alone, and (4) seems like it almost certainly has a moral component. However, in every steps from (1) to (4) you’re either better off or not worse off than you were before. Where does the moral component come from?
frosty99c@midwest.social 6 days ago
At step 3. Where the rich person forces conditions onto you and takes most of your production.