this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
64 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13687 readers
192 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Don’t be too harsh he’s a cool dude, but he unfortunately has some capitalism good musk good sentiments that I’ve been trying to dismantle for some time now and i thought I’d ask for help with this.

Or you can just dunk.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] aldalire@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I mean, i once came from this sentiment once as well and have now since been deprogrammed and changed direction leftwards. I mainly see it more as an intellectual disagreement rather than a fundamental one.

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 9 points 1 year ago

His stance is intellectually flimsy, if it were just that you wouldn't need the least bit of help

[–] nothx@hexbear.net 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Fair enough, obviously there is more nuance to people and their beliefs, but I just immediately get a certain vibe when they start acting like the 1% is actually good.

Trying to say that unhoused people have it good in New York compared other places in other time periods is reminiscent of slavery apologists acting like slaves had it good because they had housing.

Obviously I’m not trying to label your friend as a slavery apologist, I just drew comparison between the ideas.

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 8 points 1 year ago

Trying to say that unhoused people have it good in New York compared other places in other time periods is reminiscent of slavery apologists acting like slaves had it good because they had housing.

It's even dumber than that. The idea that NY homeless have it better than even literal peasants in past ages is silly, let alone having it better than the landed gentry as that fucker implies. Peasants generally had a stable means of subsistence and weren't as liable to get maimed or killed by state actors for just existing.

[–] Aryuproudomenowdaddy@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Saying "the worst get nothing" is basically one step away from saying that poor countries could be carpet bombed and the world wouldn't be lessened in any real capacity. I think a lot about how many people that could have the capacity to be brilliant medical researchers are stuck toiling away in lithium mines as slaves.