Bread hording

6 months ago by A404 to c/flippanarchy

Pirasp 85 points 6 months ago

Because one of these has a clear answer

path: 0 23285705, hotness: undefined, score: 85, children: 10

Gaja0 32 points 6 months ago

I they both have clear answers, but they're obscured by which class you're in. Rich? Obviously it's not wrong to hoard. Poor? Obviously you need to eat to survive. Because of this bias, the argument for poor's needing to steal will always be the debate, always leaving room for the rich to argue against it and justify punishment for people who find ways to make ends meet.

path: 0 23285705 23286837, hotness: undefined, score: 32, children: 7

Pirasp 20 points 6 months ago

But whom are you stealing it from? If its another poor starving family suddenly its not so clear anymore. If its the hoarding rich guy go the fuck ahead, steal it even if you aren't starving

path: 0 23285705 23286837 23286892, hotness: undefined, score: 20, children: 5

idiomaddict 9 points 6 months ago

Exactly. This man is a role model and did what I hope I would be able to do, but I wouldn’t expect that to be standard behavior, nor would I find it unforgivable if someone wasn’t able to literally starve to death while surrounded by food. Like, it is morally wrong imo, but that’s an incredible amount of self control that I would not have expected to be possible before learning about him.

path: 0 23285705 23286837 23286892 23288387, hotness: undefined, score: 9, children: 2

Claidheamh 2 points 6 months ago

He could have helped more people had he lived, no?

path: 0 23285705 23286837 23286892 23288387 23294920, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 1

Gaja0 1 point 6 months ago

This is the argument I have issue with. The truth is that the hypothetical isn't grounded in reality.

Hypothetically, if one stole from another within the same class out of necessity, it's impossible for any person to assign or deny the morality of the act.

The reality is there exists such an abundance of material needs, so much so that we have landfills for when we overproduce material needs that are not profitable. The hypothetical serves to divide the poor.

path: 0 23285705 23286837 23286892 23311216, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 1

Pirasp 1 point 6 months ago

That is reality when you look at the entire earth, but seen from an individuals point that hardly matters. You may also just replace bread with a resource that is actually scarce.

On the other hand, us debating this topic at all proves my original point, nobody felt like debating the other question at all.

path: 0 23285705 23286837 23286892 23311216 23311659, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0

zeca 2 points 6 months ago

When you phrase it like that, it's lik stealing is the only way to feed your family. If that is the case, sure stealing is obviously justified. If there are other options to feed you family, it becomes a more complicated dilemma.

It probably depends on what these other options are, who you're stealing from, etc.

path: 0 23285705 23286837 23298800, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0

Telodzrum 26 points 6 months ago

path: 0 23285705 23285825, hotness: undefined, score: 26, children: 0

jimmy90 0 points 6 months ago

this is just the commies having "being an individual" problems again

always need a strong man to take over

path: 0 23285705 23302714, hotness: undefined, score: 0, children: 0

Jaimesmith 47 points 6 months ago

Because ethics questions love focusing on individual choices, not the systems causing the problem in the first place.

path: 0 23289282, hotness: undefined, score: 47, children: 0

BarneyPiccolo 40 points 6 months ago

It is never unethical to steal food. It is unethical to stop someone from stealing food, or report someone for stealing food, or to arrest someone for stealing food.

Edit: ITT, sociopaths thinking their rationalizations for denying food to people are moral. It is NEVER unethical to steal food, got it? If someone is stealing food, it's because they're hungry, and they can't afford it. If you question that, you're just an asshole.

path: 0 23288574, hotness: undefined, score: 40, children: 30

TheSlad 17 points 6 months ago

What if you have enough food and are stealing it from some who doesnt have enough?

path: 0 23288574 23288763, hotness: undefined, score: 17, children: 15

Tonava 8 points 6 months ago

path: 0 23288574 23288763 23288985, hotness: undefined, score: 8, children: 13

captain_aggravated 2 points 6 months ago

An unethical case of stealing food: There was, for a time, a black market for geoducks.

A geoduck (pronounced gooey-duck because that's how it's said in the local native language, I don't know why it's spelled wrong in English) is a burrowing clam native to the North American West coast. They're incredibly long lived, the oldest recorded specimen was 179 years old. And their siphons look like giant cocks, which will never stop being funny.

They are edible. North Americans don't have much of a taste for them, they'd get used as a cheap meat for chowder. But they're very popular in Asia. The clams are harvested largely for export, and because of the black market, they were over-harvested, threatening the geoduck population and the overall ecosystem of the Puget Sound.

path: 0 23288574 23288763 23288985 23296066, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0

calcopiritus -14 points 6 months ago

Or what if you're a lazy asshole that decided it's easier to just steal food than do anything for society in exchange for food?

path: 0 23288574 23288763 23288985 23289031, hotness: undefined, score: -14, children: 11

MBech 13 points 6 months ago

Then I'd rather feed them and help them become a functioning member om society, than imprison them and feed them in prison.

path: 0 23288574 23288763 23288985 23289031 23289226, hotness: undefined, score: 13, children: 0

underisk 13 points 6 months ago

Cool, you’ve added a little out for misanthropes to claim that anyone who can’t feed themselves is lazy and doesn’t deserve food.

path: 0 23288574 23288763 23288985 23289031 23289723, hotness: undefined, score: 13, children: 3

BarneyPiccolo 8 points 6 months ago

There you go, the MAGA rationalization: I'd rather have 1000 children starve, than have a system where one person I dislike might gain something that I've determined they don't deserve.

path: 0 23288574 23288763 23288985 23289031 23290221, hotness: undefined, score: 8, children: 1

Rivalarrival 6 points 6 months ago

In a democracy, political authority flows from the body of the people to the government. All power wielded by the government is borrowed from the people. We The People invest our political authority in government, which uses it to provide services and justify the collection of taxes.

We are each owed a return on that investment: A "citizenship dividend". That "lazy asshole" who chooses not to do anything else is already owed a basic subsistence for the use of his political authority. He shouldn't need to steal food or do anything more for society to merely maintain his existence.

path: 0 23288574 23288763 23288985 23289031 23293369, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 2

Tonava 4 points 6 months ago

path: 0 23288574 23288763 23288985 23289031 23289198, hotness: undefined, score: 4, children: 0

rockerface 4 points 6 months ago

Then you're running a business

path: 0 23288574 23288763 23295301, hotness: undefined, score: 4, children: 0

absGeekNZ 14 points 6 months ago

"Never" and "always" are very difficult to use in a philosophical argument.

I can come up with a single ridiculous example that refutes a statement that uses such absolutes, once done the argument falls apart.

path: 0 23288574 23294796, hotness: undefined, score: 14, children: 9

zeca 2 points 6 months ago

"I'm going to the supermarket to steal food so I can save up for a new iphone. I could just steal the iPhone, but that could be unethical, so I'll steal the food instead cause that is ALWAYS ethical."

This is such a silly discussion...

path: 0 23288574 23294796 23300790, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 8

absGeekNZ 2 points 6 months ago

I'll going to steal food from a homeless person, they are too weak to fight back, ethically I'm fine, it is NEVER unethical to steal food.

path: 0 23288574 23294796 23300790 23305758, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 7

NotASharkInAManSuit 1 point 6 months ago

There is vast difference between stealing something and robbing somebody.

path: 0 23288574 23294796 23300790 23305758 23306043, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 6

BradleyUffner 7 points 6 months ago

It is never unethical to steal food.

Stealing food from someone else that doesn't have enough food.

path: 0 23288574 23298086, hotness: undefined, score: 7, children: 0

alsimoneau 6 points 6 months ago

People stealing from food banks and then throwing it away are pretty unethical in my book.

path: 0 23288574 23298338, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 0

arcine 5 points 6 months ago

You are being too categorical. The capitalists are stealing food to hoard it, which is unethical.

path: 0 23288574 23297632, hotness: undefined, score: 5, children: 0

m4xie 1 point 6 months ago

Do my neighbors pets count as food?

path: 0 23288574 23297366, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0

tyler 36 points 6 months ago

For a serious answer, because ethics is concerned with self. You already know the answer to the second question and will very likely never be in that situation. You do not know the answer to the first and have a much higher likelihood of being in that situation.

path: 0 23286090, hotness: undefined, score: 36, children: 10

bitjunkie 17 points 6 months ago

I know the answer to the first

path: 0 23286090 23286166, hotness: undefined, score: 17, children: 5

tyler -5 points 6 months ago

I’m sure your thought process involves a lot more than what is mentioned in the prompt. So you most likely do not know the answer to the first, even though you think you do.

path: 0 23286090 23286166 23287526, hotness: undefined, score: -5, children: 4

BarrelAgedBoredom 7 points 6 months ago

Property is theft. Food shouldn't be witheld from those in need. Stealing bread is an artificial problem that shouldn't exist. Ezpz

path: 0 23286090 23286166 23287526 23288612, hotness: undefined, score: 7, children: 3

Alk 2 points 6 months ago

But what if you're stealing from someone who needs it as much as you do? That's part of why the question is difficult. We're not always assuming you're stealing from someone who is hoarding.

path: 0 23286090 23286166 23287526 23288612 23294522, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 1

tyler 1 point 6 months ago

Like I said, you’re making a lot of assumptions about the first that aren’t stated. Here’s a few to get you started, though there’s many many many others.

You are stealing from a starving family
You are about to die from old age and are stealing from a very young person
You just got out of jail for murdering an immigrant and are only starving due to your own life decisions
You are starving because you wasted all your money gambling
You are stealing from a baby

Etc etc etc

path: 0 23286090 23286166 23287526 23288612 23303578, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0

tae_glas 9 points 6 months ago

both questions are concerned with self and society in general.

the first question puts survival up for debate, and the second question puts capitalism up for debate.

i'd say that most of us know the answers to both questions, but only ever asking the first question & never the second, helps people to form the idea that capitalism is just how things always have to be, and that it could/should never be changed.

path: 0 23286090 23287484, hotness: undefined, score: 9, children: 3

tyler -4 points 6 months ago

I think you have a lot of beliefs about the first that are not stated. There are many many ways to frame the first in which you would not so easily answer yes. There are very few ways to frame the second in which it’s ethical.

path: 0 23286090 23287484 23287679, hotness: undefined, score: -4, children: 2

tae_glas 10 points 6 months ago

There are very few ways to frame the second in which it’s ethical.

yeah, that's the point of the post. it's clearly unethical, and yet, capitalism continues.

path: 0 23286090 23287484 23287679 23287749, hotness: undefined, score: 10, children: 1

tyler 1 point 6 months ago

The second has nothing to do with capitalism. They are ethical questions that have nothing to do with political systems or governments. They’re meant to have you think about things in a deeper manner. There’s a lot less to think about with the second than the first and thus doesn’t really matter in an educational setting.

path: 0 23286090 23287484 23287679 23287749 23303620, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0

Brummbaer 31 points 6 months ago

As if 80% of western philosophy was written by well off people who sometimes owned slaves.

path: 0 23289551, hotness: undefined, score: 31, children: 3

UnderpantsWeevil 10 points 6 months ago

80% of western education is administered by partisan apparatchiks fulfilling an ideological mandate for their paymasters.

Western philosophy is absolutely dripping with revolutionary, abolitionist, and outright communist/anarchist sentiments. You simply aren't allowed to distribute it anywhere on a high school campus.

path: 0 23289551 23291714, hotness: undefined, score: 10, children: 1

Akasazh 3 points 6 months ago

Where did you study philosophy?

path: 0 23289551 23291714 23297968, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0

HugeNerd 1 point 6 months ago

https://youtu.be/oDQXFNWuZj8

path: 0 23289551 23294935, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0

sgibson5150 30 points 6 months ago

Read a recent poll that said 63% of U.S. adults believe that extreme wealth is not a moral issue. Only 18% think it's morally wrong. Sad. https://www.pewresearch.org/...

path: 0 23287475, hotness: undefined, score: 30, children: 4

A404 13 points 6 months ago

holy shit. how much soft power do billionaires have??

path: 0 23287475 23287500, hotness: undefined, score: 13, children: 1

snugglesthefalse 23 points 6 months ago

I think the common mistake is projecting our own thoughts onto a hypothetical. They try to put themselves in that situation, "if I had this much money I would do all these things" but the truth is that to be in that position there is a fundamental lack of humanity required and it's not easy to just disregard that.

path: 0 23287475 23287500 23287703, hotness: undefined, score: 23, children: 0

BarneyPiccolo 8 points 6 months ago

It's a mental health issue. They have OCD that manifests itself as financial hoarding.

If they had a million cats, we wouldn't keep calling them great cat owners, and give them more cats until they had a billion cats. We would recognize that that many cats is bad for the community, remove the cats from their care, and get them help for their mental illness.

So let's take away the money that is the focus of their OCD, and put them into mental hospitals until their brains are wired properly.

path: 0 23287475 23288392, hotness: undefined, score: 8, children: 0

taiyang 1 point 6 months ago

When it's phrased as wealth inequality, things are usually a little different but yeah, a ton of that survey is depressing. I mean, gambling is lower than shit like pornography... (Although again, context could change that, too, I suppose.)

path: 0 23287475 23289244, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0

jeniferariza 25 points 6 months ago

Because it’s easier to question the desperate than the powerful… flips the whole perspective when you think about it.

path: 0 23289117, hotness: undefined, score: 25, children: 1

UnderpantsWeevil 9 points 6 months ago

Typically, when you are "stealing bread", the implication is that you're taking it from someone equally needy. Capitalist propaganda loves to frame the theft of bread as an attack on low-wage grocery store workers, middle-income truckers and assistant managers, and impoverished agricultural workers.

You never see "stealing bread" framed against the backdrop of a garbage dumpster with a lock on it, to prevent people from taking food that's been thrown in the trash.

path: 0 23289117 23291743, hotness: undefined, score: 9, children: 0

OhStopYellingAtMe 22 points 6 months ago

I don’t mind stealing bread from the mouths of decadents.

path: 0 23289387, hotness: undefined, score: 22, children: 4

RememberTheApollo_ 3 points 6 months ago

I don’t know why but TIL Vedder was the singer for Temple. Can’t believe it took me that long to realize.

path: 0 23289387 23290085, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 2

nylo 3 points 6 months ago

my first read I thought you meant STP and I was like ??? how do u make that mistake??

actually it's a really cool story, Chris Cornell is the vocalist in Temple but he was struggling to hit the low notes on that song and Eddie was in the studio waiting to practice with Pearl jam and just stepped up and started singing that part, next time he was around Chris asked him to record it.

was Eddie's first time on any record apparently! i didn't know that part until today

I've always loved the way Chris explains it, "When we started rehearsing the songs, I had pulled out "Hunger Strike" and I had this feeling it was just kind of gonna be filler, it didn't feel like a real song. Eddie was sitting there kind of waiting for a (Mookie Blaylock) rehearsal and I was singing parts, and he kind of humbly—but with some balls—walked up to the mic and started singing the low parts for me because he saw it was kind of hard. We got through a couple choruses of him doing that and suddenly the light bulb came on in my head, this guy's voice is amazing for these low parts. History wrote itself after that, that became the single."

path: 0 23289387 23290085 23292409, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 1

RememberTheApollo_ 2 points 6 months ago

Now you’re confusing me? STP’s singer was Weiland, Cornell was Soundgarden… Temple of the Dog was full of future Pearl Jam members.

I always wonder how true some of these stories are from the entertainment industry. They sound good.

path: 0 23289387 23290085 23292409 23293856, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0

doingthestuff 3 points 6 months ago

But I can't feed on the powerless when my cups already overfilled.

path: 0 23289387 23290081, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0

thatradomguy 21 points 6 months ago

Is it ethical to make enough food to feed everyone but then throw it away just because of capitalism?

path: 0 23305204, hotness: undefined, score: 21, children: 1

lemmywinksthegerbilking 2 points 6 months ago

...and then criminalizing the act of recovering said thrown away food and in some countries poison it?

path: 0 23305204 23324341, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0

Windex007 20 points 6 months ago

The actual answer is that in western culture, it's generally taken as a given that stealing is wrong. It's in the 10 commandments.

"Hoarding" doesn't hold the same position in western mythos.

Applying pressure to an assumed moral certainty (thou shalt not steal) is fundamentally interesting. Applying pressure to a position where people don't hold culturally ethical baggage (hoarding) is much less so.

path: 0 23288822, hotness: undefined, score: 20, children: 4

lauha 20 points 6 months ago

Bible does state quite clearly that rich people don't go to heaven. Mark 10:25 which is cleverly ignored by most people.

Also greed is one of seven deadly sins, althougj deadly sins are not a biblical thing but invented few hundred years after by early christians.

path: 0 23288822 23289235, hotness: undefined, score: 20, children: 0

Pirasp 6 points 6 months ago

I always thought of hoarding as a way of stealing from everyone

path: 0 23288822 23289398, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 0

Rivalarrival 4 points 6 months ago

The actual answer is that in western culture, it’s generally taken as a given that stealing is wrong. It’s in the 10 commandments.

So is "coveting".

Hoarding is applied coveting, in the same way that engineering is applied physics.

And for a long time, we did indeed, understand that coveting was wrong. We implemented actual, progressive taxation to prevent it. We used to have a 91% top-tier income tax rate. We had that rate in the most prosperous decades of US history.

path: 0 23288822 23293472, hotness: undefined, score: 4, children: 1

Windex007 1 point 6 months ago

You're not wrong.

I just don't think that's part of the western experience of things so "plain" that they need not be said.

Someone even with severely impeded mental capacity could still snap back an answer to "is stealing wrong". Like, legitimate dementia.

"Is hoarding applied covetus?", probably won't get the same snappy answer.

It's just in a different league in terms of being ingrained in us so deeply we don't even realize it.

path: 0 23288822 23293472 23311717, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0

retype 18 points 6 months ago

Because the people that need the second lesson don't concern themselves with ethics courses.

path: 0 23285713, hotness: undefined, score: 18, children: 0

TrippyHippyDan 12 points 6 months ago

MBAs

path: 0 23285878, hotness: undefined, score: 12, children: 0

veniasilente 12 points 6 months ago

Because the people who create those ethics "tests" are not serving you, but are serving the subset of society that causes the second situation.

path: 0 23288112, hotness: undefined, score: 12, children: 0

ArmchairAce1944 12 points 6 months ago

The reason is because these questions are often aimed at dirt poor people, not at the rich. The rich are, despite being rich, often the single most stingy, thieving bunch in existence. If you leave a bowl of candy for everyone to take from, a few might take more than their share... but the rich will want to grab massive handfuls.

path: 0 23298423, hotness: undefined, score: 12, children: 5

Ensign_Crab 16 points 6 months ago

The rich will take the bowl, candy and all.

Then complain about the quality of the candy. And the bowl.

path: 0 23298423 23298576, hotness: undefined, score: 16, children: 4

nightlily 5 points 6 months ago

And the candy will rot in their mansion as they peddle far-right conspiracy theories on Twitter.

path: 0 23298423 23298576 23298725, hotness: undefined, score: 5, children: 3

ArmchairAce1944 7 points 6 months ago

I saw some Scrooge McDuck cartoons from the 60s that had him talk about money in a realistic way. Saying that a billion dollars is an unfathomable number, and how money must be constantly circulating otherwise problems will happen.

Even a duck tales cartoon had Scrooge lose his entire fortune so he decided to start from scratch again... And then realized that the world he was able to start his fortune in is no longer there and he cannot succeed again even if he did exactly what he did prior.

On top of that, the existence of his Lucky Dime and how his luck changes dramatically if he loses it is also an acknowledgement of the importance of luck.

path: 0 23298423 23298576 23298725 23304865, hotness: undefined, score: 7, children: 2

Honytawk 1 point 6 months ago

That is because Scrooge wasn't written bij actual rich people. So of course he knows nuance.

path: 0 23298423 23298576 23298725 23304865 23314477, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 1

miyaheemiyahoo 7 points 6 months ago

This actually highlights an important distinction in meta ethics (ethics about how to determine ethics). There is a divide amongst philosophers of what makes sense in pure analytical logic, and what makes sense in contextual reasoning. This divide is also shown to come up in "continental" vs "English speaking" philosophies. The two approach how to examine not just ethics, but truth overall in very different ways. I personally am of the belief that there needs to be an integration of these two in order for ethics to properly work, but to summarize this already too long Lemmy comment into one idea: fuck hoarding value of any kind.

path: 0 23298429, hotness: undefined, score: 7, children: 0

Kaligalis 7 points 6 months ago

Because in our (western) society, boldness and greed are universally honored to the point that corporations are generally seen as a means to enrich their owner rather than society as a whole. If you can afford it, and it's not explicitly outlawed, it's ethically right.

path: 0 23299037, hotness: undefined, score: 7, children: 0

DupaCycki 6 points 6 months ago

Because ethics don't exist as far as the ones hoarding bread in this scenario are concerned.

And because you following ethics is directly beneficial for them. As long as you act 'ethically', they remain at the top and nothing can be done about it.

path: 0 23305626, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 2

BygoneNeutrino 1 point 6 months ago

path: 0 23305626 23307022, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 1

wewbull 5 points 6 months ago

I get what you're saying, but America has real problems with cheap, highly processed foods which are addictive in nature. If you're low income you're likely to be eating low nutrition foods packed with sugar.

path: 0 23305626 23307022 23307117, hotness: undefined, score: 5, children: 0

arcine 5 points 6 months ago

Systematically answering "Is hoarding bread unethical" with "No" should result in the other questions being irrelevant.

Bread should be free. We already have enough for everyone. No one has to starve anymore, scarcity is a LIE.

path: 0 23297625, hotness: undefined, score: 5, children: 0

rotkehlchen 4 points 6 months ago

Just upvoted this to 666. So you all know

path: 0 23292572, hotness: undefined, score: 4, children: 0

Korhaka 4 points 6 months ago

Is it ethical to hoard land when families would willingly farm that land to grow food for themselves? Same question with housing - I am capable of building a small structure to live in perfectly happily but its illegal. Not a builder so the best I could do would likely just be a bit better than van living, but I could do it if it wasn't illegal.

path: 0 23297825, hotness: undefined, score: 4, children: 0

Alberat 3 points 6 months ago

we should be making sure no one goes hungry. but the answer to op's question is that the second hypothetical isn't interesting (obviously it's not ethical to hoard bread) and ethical questions are made to spark debate

path: 0 23308442, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0

HeroHelck 2 points 6 months ago

"But until the sage is dead, great thieves will never cease to appear, and if you pile on more sages in hopes of bringing the world to order, you will only be piling up more profit for Robber Chih. Fashion pecks and bushels for people to measure by and they will steal by peck and bushel.5 Fashion scales and balances for people to weigh by and they will steal by scale and balance. Fashion tallies and seals to insure trustworthiness and people will steal with tallies and seals. Fashion benevolence and righteousness to reform people and they will steal with benevolence and righteousness. How do I know this is so? He who steals a belt buckle pays with his life; he who steals a state gets to be a feudal lord-and we all know that benevolence and righteousness are to be found at the gates of the feudal lords. Is this not a case of stealing benevolence and righteousness and the wisdom of the sages?" Chapter 10 of Zhuangzi (Stolen Chests), Burton Watson translation.

path: 0 23314904, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0

Grandwolf319 2 points 6 months ago

Because ownership is never questioned.

The biggest psyop in modern civilization is believing someone has the right to something as long as they have already “owned” it.

path: 0 23293198, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0

Nosavingthrow 1 point 6 months ago

Both of these questions sound like a learning aide. You ask these types of questions because they have obvious answers, and you then have students explain their rationale, right?

path: 0 23298662, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0

rebelsimile -1 points 6 months ago

“Why is no one asking this ethical question I am currently asking?”

path: 0 23291291, hotness: undefined, score: -1, children: 1

nsrxn -2 points 6 months ago

I'm 14 and this is deep

path: 0 23291291 23292493, hotness: undefined, score: -2, children: 0

NostraDavid -21 points 6 months ago

path: 0 23286500, hotness: undefined, score: -21, children: 32

Doc_Crankenstein 19 points 6 months ago

Imagine thinking that having solidarity and basic empathy is dumb. Wild take.

path: 0 23286500 23286558, hotness: undefined, score: 19, children: 7

NostraDavid -1 points 6 months ago

path: 0 23286500 23286558 23297138, hotness: undefined, score: -1, children: 6

Doc_Crankenstein 4 points 6 months ago

This "fuck you I got mine" attitude is why the world is shit.

You have no concept of "community".

path: 0 23286500 23286558 23297138 23298796, hotness: undefined, score: 4, children: 1

NostraDavid 1 point 6 months ago

path: 0 23286500 23286558 23297138 23298796 23306110, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0

Ensign_Crab 3 points 6 months ago

I do not have the responsibility, let alone the power, to help literally everybody.

Nor the willingness to help anybody but your own.

path: 0 23286500 23286558 23297138 23305040, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 3

NostraDavid -1 points 6 months ago

path: 0 23286500 23286558 23297138 23305040 23306602, hotness: undefined, score: -1, children: 2

gibmiser 12 points 6 months ago

Edgelord. Grow up.

path: 0 23286500 23286672, hotness: undefined, score: 12, children: 2

NostraDavid -2 points 6 months ago

path: 0 23286500 23286672 23297210, hotness: undefined, score: -2, children: 1

gibmiser 2 points 6 months ago

Mhmm yep. Waa life's not fair people are jerks so I'm going to be a jerk too.

Allow me to repeat myself, Edgelord, GROW UP.

path: 0 23286500 23286672 23297210 23302178, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0

A404 10 points 6 months ago

Yeah, those little kids deserve to be forced to work in lithium mines. They should have tought about it before being born in a poor country /s

path: 0 23286500 23286927, hotness: undefined, score: 10, children: 1

NostraDavid -1 points 6 months ago

path: 0 23286500 23286927 23297228, hotness: undefined, score: -1, children: 0

WhyIHateTheInternet 9 points 6 months ago

Ok Nostradumbass

path: 0 23286500 23287521, hotness: undefined, score: 9, children: 0

NotASharkInAManSuit 6 points 6 months ago

If those families are not my friends, why should I care?

Basic human decency.

path: 0 23286500 23289912, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 5

NostraDavid -1 points 6 months ago

path: 0 23286500 23289912 23297156, hotness: undefined, score: -1, children: 4

NotASharkInAManSuit 2 points 6 months ago

Where does radical self-sacrifice and the erasure of loyalties come into play in this situation?

path: 0 23286500 23289912 23297156 23297638, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 3

NostraDavid 1 point 6 months ago

path: 0 23286500 23289912 23297156 23297638 23305870, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 2

Ensign_Crab 3 points 6 months ago

Libertarians are just republicans who are more open about not wanting statutory rape to be a crime.

path: 0 23286500 23298622, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 4

NostraDavid 1 point 6 months ago

path: 0 23286500 23298622 23306004, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 3

Ensign_Crab 1 point 6 months ago

Sorry, you sounded exactly like Ayn fucking Rand, so I kinda figured...

path: 0 23286500 23298622 23306004 23306025, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 2

NostraDavid 1 point 6 months ago

path: 0 23286500 23298622 23306004 23306025 23306629, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 1

redsand 2 points 6 months ago

Because the time may come that they take it and before that you may miss out on something just because someone else you don't directly know didn't eat. 1D chess nostrdumbass

path: 0 23286500 23292246, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 6

NostraDavid -2 points 6 months ago

path: 0 23286500 23292246 23297190, hotness: undefined, score: -2, children: 5

redsand 1 point 6 months ago

Watch the kurzgesagt on altruism.

path: 0 23286500 23292246 23297190 23302340, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 4

NostraDavid 0 points 6 months ago

path: 0 23286500 23292246 23297190 23302340 23306508, hotness: undefined, score: 0, children: 3

flippanarchy

@lemmy.dbzer0.com

login for more options

Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.

Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.

This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.

Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Rules

If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text
If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.
Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.
Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.
No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.
This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.
No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can't control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.

Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

Banner by @Val@anarchist.nexus

go to feed...

flippanarchy

@lemmy.dbzer0.com

login for more options

Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.

Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.

This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.

Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Rules

If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text
If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.
Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.
Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.
No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.
This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.
No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can't control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.

Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

Banner by @Val@anarchist.nexus

go to feed...