This is my last response to you because you are disingenuous and I’m tired of writing the same things again and again. If you are sick and starving and the society that you belong to refuses to effectively aid you I would argue it is morally good to steal from companies that create and perpetuate the systems of oppression. This is not a hard thought experiment. It is the same as saying there are times where it is morally right to lie. You once again refuse to actually engage with the core of my argument. Your ideas have no substance and your analysis of these situations is elementary to the point that I think I may be arguing with a teenager. I’m done, bye.
Comment on No one could have seen this coming
MacNCheezus@lemmy.today 1 day agoAnd i am not saying that stealing is morally good in all cases.
Okay, in which cases would you say that stealing is morally good?
Please be as precise as possible. This is very important.
your_dead_pet_goldfish@lemmy.world 22 hours ago
MacNCheezus@lemmy.today 15 hours ago
Why am I disingenuous? Were you or were you not making the case that theft could sometimes be considered morally good?
I find it more disingenuous of you to try and just brush over that by asking me to engage with a completely different argument about the system being the problem.
The system does not care if you steal from it. As you said yourself, the CEO of the supermarket does not pay for the losses out of his own pocket. He’ll just raise prices or lock things up behind glass so that ultimately, we’re ALL paying for it. Your so-called “charity” ends up costing everyone.
your_dead_pet_goldfish@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
Okay, turns out I lied because now you are making an actual argument. I called you disingenuous because you weren’t actually saying anything meaningful or actually engaging what i was saying.
I never shied away from the fact that i think stealing is sometimes the more moral option nor did I brush past this. Sometimes stealing is good if it keeps people alive. I think more people being alive is good. The system being the problem is not disconnected and i think is the bigger point here. I think your anger is fundamentally misplaced and that this misplaced anger and frustration is harmful to vulnerable people in hard sotuations while codifying the current systems that keep people poor and vulnerable.
Almost no large corporation experience a level of theft that requires them to increase prices. Many large stores have been having record profits, while the value of stolen goods amounts to less than 1% of the generated profits. So if an elderly woman on a fixed income can’t afford her groceries anymore, it is most likely not because theft caused a store to raise its prices, but rather because executives decided they could get away with raising those prices. I reject the notion that these large corporations are actually significantly impacted by theft no matter what they say because the numbers tell a different story.
Again if elderly folks cant afford necessities it doesn’t help to blame other poor people. The system is the problem so we need to change the system, not punish other poor people harder. You cannot separate my argument for theft being moral under certain circumstances from the recognition of the system being the actual problem. The former is the branch the latter the root, and if you want to effect meaningful change you need to strike the root.
Ideally i want a world where everyone has access to everything they need without stealing, where everyone has equitabble access to food, energy, clothing, etc, but we arent there yet and the system perpetuates injustice which sometimes requires on to shoplift to survive.
MacNCheezus@lemmy.today 9 hours ago
I’m glad you’re willing to have a respectful debate, and I’m certainly not trying to be disingenuous, but this is a complex topic and it warrants some measure of diligence. We’re talking about people’s lives here, after all.
Almost no large corporation experience a level of theft that requires them to increase prices.
Sorry, but this claim is going to require some evidence.
Many large stores have been having record profits, while the value of stolen goods amounts to less than 1% of the generated profits.
First of all “many” may be doing a lot of heavy lifting here, but even without that, you do understand the difference between a single store turning a profit, and the entire company doing the same, right?
It is certainly possible that the company as a whole was only profitable because they closed underperforming stores, because that would free up a lot of expenses if they can let go of all the employees and either sell the real estate (or stop paying rent for it), so unfortunately the company as a whole making a profit does not prove that theft isn’t hurting them. You can survive a fight while bleeding from a head wound as long as you get first aid soon enough, but that doesn’t mean you won the confrontation.
Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 22 hours ago
There was a comic on here a while back that had a hungry guy walk up to the grocer and ask for a job. The grocer said no. Then he asked for food and the grocer said no. So he took the food.
If you can’t get what you need to survive using the social system (unfortunately it’s currently poorly regulated crony capitalism), and you can’t get what you need through charity, then you TAKE what you need to survive.
Any system that lets you die when you were willing to work is a failed system.
MacNCheezus@lemmy.today 16 hours ago
There are currently several comics on here that feature talking animals. That proves talking animals are real.