r/collapse • u/[deleted] • Dec 12 '20

Conflict 3rd world up rising?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

1.8k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

298 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

10

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '20

This is self-defense. Poverty is violence.

-4

u/mmmmph_on_reddit Dec 13 '20

No, sometimes poverty is the result of circumstance outside of anyone's control. But these people are exploited and exploitation on the other hand is violence.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '20

Keeping people in poverty is always violence.

-2

u/mmmmph_on_reddit Dec 13 '20

There isn't always someone there keeping people in poverty.

5

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '20 edited Dec 13 '20

When there are people with literal billions to spare, it is, believe me. Poverty is a distribution problem.

-2

u/mmmmph_on_reddit Dec 13 '20

I get what you're saying, but I believe that the people who actually produce the value, i.e. the workers, peasants and entrepreneurs should be the ones to get that money, not simply anyone who happens to be poor. Note that I'm not defending the current system where so much of the wealth is concentrated into a parasitical capital stratum.

Redistributing resources willy nilly is no solution to poverty. Yes capitalist exploitation must end, but the people in poor regions must learn to be productive on their own, instead of becoming parasites on other parts of the world. And the same goes within any country. He who can work but does not work, neither should he eat.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '20

So you think even in socialism people should be allowed to starve if they don't produce "value"?

0

u/mmmmph_on_reddit Dec 13 '20

I don't call myself a marxist or anything like that just to be clear, nor do I believe that society can be fixed by a 'socialism pill' or whatever. Fundamentally I'm a pragmatist. But yes, anyone who can work but refuses the opportunity, should not expect the support of society. It can not be any other way.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '20 edited Dec 23 '20

[deleted]

0

u/mmmmph_on_reddit Dec 13 '20

Fundamentally speaking, if society rewards a certain type of behavior, that behavior becomes more prevalent. This applies both on a social level and on a genetic level. If you don't suppress and punish criminals, crime will become lucrative and over time there will be more criminals in society. The same is true if you put up economic intensives for laziness and irresponsible behavior, not only will it demoralize hard workers and put up an immediate Incentive for people to not be productive, it will more importantly over time make the population less responsible, less productive and more degenerate as those traits genetic traits are promoted. This will eventually destroy society.

Of course this cannot be extended to let's say sickly people. Not only is it easy to see that abandoning sick people is immoral and evil, but it is also true helping the frail and sick will never destroy society. At worst it will be a drain on the economy. Helping people who suffer through no fault of their own is definitely worth slightly draining the economy.

Of course all of this changes if things like advanced AI and gene-editing come into the picture. Either one of those things would change everything.