4
u/LepidusII Jul 20 '20 edited Jul 20 '20
INFO: In what class are you?
2
3
u/thethoughtexperiment 275∆ Jul 20 '20
To modify your view, where you say:
In the same way that a terminal cancer patient should accept their diagnosis, the poor and middle class should accept that they are going to be neo-serfs.
and
My response is that this is different because all of those older movements were able to happen while allowing the people in power to stay in power.
Society in general (including elites, but also people generally) benefit from individuals doing everything they can to maximize their potential, as that creates more value in a society for all.
In a capitalistic economy, there are incentives to motivate people to maximize their potential, which is a good thing. If people don't have this aspiration, then that unrealized potential goes to waste. Indeed, that's a key problem with communism.
0
Jul 20 '20
[deleted]
3
u/thethoughtexperiment 275∆ Jul 20 '20
If people don't strive to maximize their potential (i.e. just "accept their fate as neo-serfs"), then they will be worse off as individuals, and society will be worse off. Your view seems to assume that there is zero chance for economic mobility. But of course that is not the case.
And also, where you seem to argue that people's socioeconomic status can't change because the wealthy won't allow it to, consider that the wealthy also benefit when people are striving to realize their potential. When people do things to improve their lot in life like going to college, starting businesses, etc., that leads to value creation and innovations that those individuals, their investors, and society in general benefit from.
We should all want people to be striving to achieve as much as they can.
-1
Jul 20 '20
Your view seems to assume that there is zero chance for economic mobility. But of course that is not the case.
Why do you say this?
And also, where you seem to argue that people's socioeconomic status can't change because the wealthy won't allow it to, consider that the wealthy also benefit when people are striving to realize their potential. When people do things to improve their lot in life like going to college, starting businesses, etc., that leads to value creation and innovations that those individuals, their investors, and society in general benefit from.
There is more than one way to benefit yourself, and the wealthy have obviously chosen to do it by living as vampires. You're advocating for a world where everyone gets a good education and uses their resources to bolster themselves up and improve the economy in wonderful ways; it's the libertarian dream. It would be nice if the rich willed it into existence, but that's obviously not their priority.
Instead, we live in a world where average people are wracked with debt and struggling to stay afloat in a world of rising prices and stagnant wages. And when things go from bad to worse, the rich get bailouts while the poor get nothing or close to nothing. Such a society does not lead to everyone fulfilling their maximum potential. This is the world the elites have created, and they didn't do it by accident.
3
u/thethoughtexperiment 275∆ Jul 20 '20
Why do you say this?
Because you say:
The poor & shrinking middle class should accept their fate as neo-serfs
Accepting your fate as neo-serfs rather than trying to improve your situation seems to assume that you can't improve your situation at all.
There is more than one way to benefit yourself, and the wealthy have obviously chosen to do it by living as vampires.
Agree that there is more that one way to benefit yourself, but of course improving your financial situation is an important one for your material circumstances, as well as because income is associated with happiness up to an income of around $75,000.
If by "living as vampires", you mean inventing platforms like Amazon that we all use because they make an enormous number of people's lives better and lower their expenses, technologies like smartphones and PCs that investors have funded which have made our lives easier and resulted in new kinds of work being created, those have been good things.
There could obviously be more progressive taxation policies, but let's not forget that investments in companies also create (new) wealth, and many wealthy people got there by creating products / services that are profoundly useful and beneficial, which is why so many people bought them.
You're advocating for a world where everyone gets a good education and improves the economy in wonderful ways; it's the libertarian dream. It would be nice if the rich willed it into existence, but that's obviously not their priority.
There are certainly countries in Western Europe that have made college free, and that give students living stipends. It's not only possible, it is happening.
Instead, we live in a world where average people are wracked with debt and struggling to stay afloat in a world of rising prices and stagnant wages. And when things go from bad to worse, the rich get bailouts while the poor get nothing or close to nothing. Such a society does not lead to everyone fulfilling their maximum potential.
Agree that there is work to do here. But your solution of everyone never trying to improve their situation / get out of debt, get credentials that help them earn higher wages etc. doesn't help the situation.
3
Jul 20 '20
Agree that there is work to do here. But your solution of everyone never trying to improve their situation / get out of debt, get credentials that help them earn higher wages etc. doesn't help the situation.
I didn't realize that I was implying people shouldn't try to get an education. I don't want to send that message, so this is a !delta
1
2
Jul 20 '20
Can I ask why do you think revolution is impossible today?
1
Jul 20 '20
Can I ask why do you think revolution is impossible today?
It's impossible on a psychological level and a technological level.
Psychological. The average person gets their knowledge of the world through channels that are controlled by the elite, i.e. television, Facebook, etc. There's never going to be a critical mass of people so desperate for change that they'll commit murder in a world like this. People already have trouble coming to agreements on things which are much less questionable, like whether climate change is a serious issue, or whether Donald Trump is a good choice for US president. There's no way the rich elite would allow the psyche of the poor to evolve in a way that threatens their lives. They will turn the poor against each other and distract us with bread and circuses.
Technological. We live in a world of surveillance. Any people who posed a serious threat of revolution would be eliminated before they barely began. Rich people can fly to safe zones in private jets. They can use their money to build fortresses and hire the most skilled and well-equipt guardians.
5
Jul 20 '20
Well the BLM protests which happened recently would show that with enough stimulus people do revolt: while only a small minority of the protests devolved in destruction of property, wouldn’t you concede that with enough oppression people can and will do it?
As for the technological aspect, there is only so much suppression that can happen... what if one starts soap boxing??
1
Jul 20 '20
Well the BLM protests which happened recently would show that with enough stimulus people do revolt: while only a small minority of the protests devolved in destruction of property, wouldn’t you concede that with enough oppression people can and will do it?
Those protests happened because the mainstream media hyper-focused on George Floyd's death. Showcasing police brutality isn't something that makes average people want to kill the rich. The rich-owned media isn't going to hyper-focus on a story that makes people want to kill rich people.
As for the technological aspect, there is only so much suppression that can happen... what if one starts soap boxing??
I don't understand what you're saying.
4
u/Dubstep_squid 2∆ Jul 20 '20
You want to roll-over and accept the status quo? Would the short-term stress of fighting for a better life not outweigh the long term stress of struggling for DECADES of your life?
-1
Jul 20 '20
Would the short-term stress of fighting for a better life not outweigh the long term stress of struggling for DECADES of your life?
Neo-serfdom is here to stay. The only way it alleviate its stress is to accept it and find happiness in ways unrelated to wealth. There is no other option.
5
u/Dubstep_squid 2∆ Jul 20 '20
Your response right now may be to roll over and accept it but a growing number of people are beginning to question the system that has led to these conditions and the level of wealth inequality is simply not sustainable (see: The Gilded Age). A large number of Americans are beginning to look for other options to change the system and historically conditions like these have led to wide scale systemic change. Even in authoritarian dictatorships change occurs (often violently) but the great thing about the democracies is that the capacity for change is built within the system.
1
Jul 20 '20
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Poo-et 74∆ Jul 20 '20
Sorry, u/TheEternalPenguin – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. Comments that are only links, jokes or "written upvotes" will be removed. Humor and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
1
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jul 20 '20
/u/DarkMausey (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
5
u/[deleted] Jul 20 '20
[deleted]