Elaborate and explain

  • rowinxavier@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    27 days ago

    All evidence points to a regime change (in the physics sense, not the political) being the necessary condition for things to go from our current state to something new.

    We currently have people paying poorer people a very small amount of their own net worth to protect the wealthy person’s status and position. This is similar to how kings and queens paid the army and policing forces to control the peasants.

    Before the French Revolution I am sure it seemed impossible that the peasants would revolt, but the years leading up to the revolution things were getting worse and worse for the average peasant. There is a tipping point where the average person does not think the current system is delivering on the promise that of you do what you are told you can have a good life. I think we are approaching that point now.

    If the rich try to hire someone and underpay them for security, stiff contractors for services, flaunt laws and generally behave obnoxiously at some point people will have had enough. Whether that ends with guillotine action or people just divesting from those systems depends on how much freedom people think they have.

    If people thought they could go and homestead, live off the land, and get by without the massive companies these billionaires own then they would have that outlet and choose that peaceful option. The fact that we have taxation creates a pressure to pay in currency which demands earning in that currency. Same with paying rent, you have to earn money simply to live. No amount of growing all of your food gets rid of your financial obligations, so there is no out from the system. If that system is unreasonable it begins to feel less like participation and more like coercive control. Wage slavery is not the same as slavery, but both involve coercion and require the legal system to support them. Both lead to revolutions. Both lead to violence.

    I guess the billionaires have to decide if they really want to paint that big a target on their backs by flaunting their wealth. At this point I think they feel untouchable.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      27 days ago

      Mostly all agreed, but the populace isn’t starving, not even close. I’m not arguing that we’re not suffering, only that we’re nowhere near suffering enough for a revolt. But damned do I like what you’ve written!

      • rowinxavier@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Just a quick point, you aren’t starving. Plenty of people are not getting their basic needs met. There are tonnes of people who are unhoused, lots of people, especially kids, experiencing food insecurity, and a huge number of women specifically are living in abusive situations because they do not have the means to live outside those situations. Starving is failing to meet one need, but there are plenty of other needs that lead to death if not met. People die from cold and heat purely because of cost. Those deaths are no less tragic because it was cold rather than a lack of calories.

    • Kevo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      27 days ago

      The biggest ruse in American history is the modern billionaire convincing the working class Americans that the immigrants, homeless, people of color, and LGBT+ people are the real enemy and the reason you’re unhappy. Capitalism is the only functioning system of government, don’t pay attention to the fact that almost every other developed country has universal healthcare.