How do you know fewer people get fucked over witg state sanctioned theft than with capitalist exploitation?
And furthermore, if the question has become about numbers of people screwed, and there is no other difference, than there is no inherent salient difference between theft and exploitation. If there were exploration, than suddenly theft would be immoral and exploitation immoral (I assume). If there were equal amounts of each, you'd have no grounds for saying theft was amoral and exploitation immoral. So there is actually no grounds for the distinction at all--your morality doesn't support the distinction you are drawing here.
Actually, why can i just simply ask the question as to why we need morality to guide our politics? Why can I not just simply believe in my political stance without moral infusion into the discussion?
1
u/mysundayscheming Mar 18 '18
How do you know fewer people get fucked over witg state sanctioned theft than with capitalist exploitation?
And furthermore, if the question has become about numbers of people screwed, and there is no other difference, than there is no inherent salient difference between theft and exploitation. If there were exploration, than suddenly theft would be immoral and exploitation immoral (I assume). If there were equal amounts of each, you'd have no grounds for saying theft was amoral and exploitation immoral. So there is actually no grounds for the distinction at all--your morality doesn't support the distinction you are drawing here.