• lightnsfw@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    A fuckload of people are really going to have to make an effort to get their shit together for that to happen. As things stand the majority are dead weight.

    • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I think at this point, we are just flat out overpopulated. There are simply too many people competing for resources and a significant number of them just merely exist without contributing a whole lot back to society.

      • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yea, it’s really hard to get my head around any kind of communist type of ideals when I know I’d be doing 3x the work of pretty much everyone around me for the same outcome as them. Not that capitalism is much better but at least with that I get SOMETHING more to show for my efforts

        • m13@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          That’s not really true.

          Right now under the capitalist systems there are countless jobs that are detrimental to the world we live in, or don’t actually produce anything of tangible value.

          We would be a lot better off if a lot of people just didn’t do their “jobs”.

          We don’t need a hundred types of sugar water, Or McDonald’s plastic toys. Landlords, bankers, stock brokers, financial planners, most lawyers are all useless.

          Overpopulation is also a Malthusian myth. It isn’t that we have too many people. Under capitalism resources are not distributed well. It doesn’t make sense that most of us are working in a system that expects infinite growth with the finite resources our world is limited to. All in order to make a handful of people increasingly wealthy while the rest of us increasingly can’t afford to live a basic, simple life.

          We can and must work toward building a new system (spoiler: it’s called Anarchism) while dismantling the old, inefficient, destructive system we are currently forced to try to survive in.

          • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Which part of what I said is not true? My point was most people are fucking lazy and will do everything they can to leave shit to be done by others. I’m always the one at my job cleaning up after other people’s fuckups and the one people go to for answers because I actually made the effort to learn everything. Under capitalism this is noticed by my superiors and I’m top of the list any time a promotion becomes available and I have an in if I’m trying to get hired at a different company and people I know have went there resulting in more pay for me than my coworkers who don’t make an effort in their work. Under a system where everyone is just given what they need I would be getting the exact same life as people who are doing far less than me.

            Also how can you say overpopulation is a myth and simultaneously say there are finite resources in our world? Finite means we will run out.

            • mojo_raisin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              My thoughts about this

              Anarcho-communism (and similar ideologies) isn’t really about everyone being equal, that’s a silly goal that would take enforcement and calculations, it’s not practical. Instead, anarcho-communism is a different way of living based on cooperation rather than exploitation and doing what is needed for people rather than what a few rich owners want.

              You and a “lazy” person won’t necessarily have the same outcome. A person unwilling to even pick up after themselves or contribute would still be guaranteed housing, food, and health care, but that’s about it. You on the other hand could work to have a nicer place or acquire things, so long as you aren’t getting them exploiting others or common resources. If you build a nice chair the anarcho-fuzz isn’t gonna come and take it to split it amongst the community.


              The thinking around “laziness” needs to change. A person unwilling to do even the absolute minimum might be called lazy, but A person unwilling to trade their time for money isn’t a bad thing. It’s not the “lazy” people that wipe out species, start wars, and cause climate change.

              • Laurentide@pawb.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Let’s also not forget that a lot of those “lazy” people are actually struggling with illness, insecurity, lack of critical resources, discrimination, burnout from “the grind”, or just plain don’t see the point in contributing much to a system that never seems to contribute anything back. Guaranteed housing, food, and healthcare would fix a lot of the problems that cause “laziness”.