How quickly we accepted that it’s normal to pay someone to go get our groceries for us. To drive us around when public transportation is available. To run errands for us. To bring us fast food.
Covid capitalized on it.
People don’t want to give up that luxury now that they’ve had it. Even if it makes things cost 2x-3x as much.
Even when we all know its exploitive labor.
It’s true delivery and driver services have been around for hundreds of years but now instead of companies with full time employees (with benefits) , the gig employee gets paid less while taking on risk that aren’t compensated by the employer (car accidents, gas, car repairs, injury or attacks).
Gig work is a much worse thing than maybe a lot of people realize. And it’s also making more people servants to others.
It’s moving full time employees with benefits and using company property to no benefits and using their own property that they have to pay for.
Capitalism cannot be fixed. The only way to reform it is for the the ruling class to be permanently eliminated. You cannot reform the rich and the sick. You can only remove them permanently. However, you have to also remove anyone who is genetically related to them. Their children. Grandchildren. Siblings. Cousins. In laws. Parents. Aunts. Uncles.
If even one is allowed to live, the risk of them passing on their sick and diseased genes will ensure that a clean break cannot happen.
You can’t fix the sick with thoughts and prayers (conservatives) or logic and rehabilitation (liberals). You can only cull them.
The French understood this.
Great idea, we still have some buildings here in germany that were used for such a cleansing purpose before! I am sure they only need a bit of maintenance.
The above is sarcasm!
Killing people, and even more so genocide or mass murder, is NEVER a valid option! Every idea, ideology or system that includes killing people is always rotten to the core!
Those rich fucks would off you without a second thought. They don’t understand anything beyond greed and fear.
So you propose the Final Solution to the Rich Question then? Maybe you should read a history book, and ask yourself if you are the baddy!
Read plenty of then. Find me a history where the ruling class was the oppressed? The marginalized?
Wait. You can’t.
I think @DarkMetatron@feddit.de is implying for us to be better than them and not stoop to killing. (I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing and am just inferring this line of thought.)
I want to believe that… But so did Michelle Obama and look where we are at now.
Forgive me, but this position is one of absolute impotence.
Your solution is a “mass culling”, but you are without the power to put such a plan into action. Furthermore, you know that this type of solution is unlikely to gain any sort of mainstream approval.
Further, why would in-laws need to be culled if your solution relies on genetically based criteria?
Personally, I don’t think that greed or selfishness are traits of a psychotic mind. They are human flaws, present in nearly every person on this planet. You can’t get rid of these traits - they are inherent survival instincts, found in all of us.
Laura Trump. Erika Kirk. Etc. Takes a certain type of shit stain to marry a monster.
Mackenzie Bezos and Melinda Gates were outliers.
I totally get that they’re outrageously upsetting people, but what would be the governing body to go get them and how would you ensure that they wouldn’t simply money themselves out of it? Like someone else on here said, more would just crop up if you don’t enact a systemwide change to adjust people’s mindsets in the first place.
Everything I pulled up online said psychopathy development definitely involves both nature and nurture (some articles said the influence is even), and we sure as heck haven’t exhausted the latter yet: nowhere near.
I think Hitler also think the same.
Hitler targeted the wrong people.
Wait, are you calling for a genocide of all people with inherited, terminal syndromes? Are you serious? What about CRISPR?
If the gene is one that allows psychopathy, inherent greed, and lack of empathy, then yes.
Oh, I thought you were referring to physical disabilities, like all Down-syndrome people, etc.
Well, I’ve never read of a sociopath who had said, “I was raised in a normal family.” I thought this was a really interesting read:
- https://scienceinsights.org/is-sociopathy-genetic-nature-nurture-and-the-brain/
God no.
Exceptional people can be exceptional. My daughter is thrice exceptional (asd, ADHD, gifted). I would never advocate the elimination of people born with physical disabilities. They are some of the best and most resilient people if not tainted by the environment.
My issue is the ruling class and psychopathy that has been passed along since well before 5000 BC. The ruling class has never been fully purged in all aspects except very close during the French Revolution and the Bolshevik revolution.
Both of those failed long term because of usurpers like Robespierre (psycho) and Stalin (false revolutionary).
There is no evidence that psychopathy is determined by a gene.
Like most human traits, the environment makes a bigger impact on outcomes.
Until we as a society/species stop rewarding psychopathy , things will keep ending up here.
Genetics are irrelevant.
However I do agree that capitalism cannot work.
It is inevitable destruction.
Also pretty sure capitalism wasn’t the structure during French revolution. Wasn’t it serfdom ?
I mean. That’s almost the same. But yeah.
We need to stay fully objective here and acknowledge that @devolution@lemmy.world is at least partly correct:
Denser reading:
I didn’t know this until now myself (I’ve seen the above article earlier but must have skimmed through it long ago and missed or forgot all that). However, there’s also a lot about the environment further exposing or shutting down sociopathic tendencies, as I noted in another comment here. It could be more difficult to round up these people (who are masters at lying anyway) versus enacting your systemwide proposal to forcefully integrate empathy through all levels of society. The problem is applying it to the highest echelons where it matters most—and, frankly, who @devolution@lemmy.world’s proposed guillotine should apply to the most either way; they’d both be hard to do… maybe together?
Psychopathy is a combination of genetics and environmental factors. Genetics does not cause this condition. You can have the genes associated with higher prevalence but that does not mean you will have it.
This is why eugenics for behavioral or personality factors is irrelevant.
Also these are not necessarily hereditary but likely are common mutations that will persist in the gene pool regardless if current people with said gene are sterilized.
Genetic research, not to sound pretentious, is largely misunderstood.
When a study says genetics are 30%. It means genetics account for 30% of the variance.
The variance is not “effect”. Or how much a gene contributed to the trait.
It’s a bit more complicated. But to make a simple example.
Let’s think of height.
Let’s say someone has a gene(s) for being tall.
But the person grew up malnourished. It doesnt matter, the kid won’t be tall. But will the kid be taller than other malnourished kids with out the gene. ? Probably. But it’s hard to say by how much.
Will the kid be taller than other kids that werent malnourished.
Maybe. Maybe not.
If extreme malnourished, the answer is no.
Ultimately the environment determines how much effect a gene(s) can determine a trait.
That’s why you can’t measure a general effect % from a gene(s).
Instead we measure how much variation in a group of people with a given trait is predicted by a gene.
“The wiggle room”. A gene is best thought of as the limits of a trait. Each extreme.
When it’s in optimal environment to be expressed and when it’s in the most restricted environment to be expressed.
Even in average environments, genetics still usually doesn’t account for more that 30-40% of the variance for people who score within 1 standard deviation of the mean/average of a trait. And that number declines the farther you get from the mean.
And also most genetics don’t score that high. Very few are as high as 30%.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_variance
If your argument is nature vs nurture, then all the more reason for a mass culling.
No. The environment has to be changed.
We can stop promoting the wrong people.
We can have harsh penalties for lying. Exploitation
In the Netherlands, any company found to be un ethical business are barred from getting government contracts.
Also companies with better employee benefits, unions, and pay are prioritized for government contracts.
That’s how to combat the problem.
But in the u.s and most of the world. The most ruthless gets the contact. The one that lies the most. Defrauds. Exploits. They get the contacts for decades.
Most of musk’s and palantir money is from u.s tax payers.
The wrong people need to be eliminated. You’re too idealistic. We’re beyond voting them out.
The system creates these bad people.
You have to stop the cause.
It’s not genetics.
Just look at Vivian Musk. Nothing like her father.
You don’t permanently eliminate the ruling class by killing the people in it. Elites will continue popping up as long as the system itself allows it. Incentives are just too biased towards people betraying and becoming elite when there is an empty slot.
Who do you think shapes the system to allow it?
I completely understand your frustration, and I am completely on your side that we need to dismantle capitalism.
The thing is, though, if we use mass violence to abolish the ruling class in the way you advocate, will not work at all.
I’m not saying that the movement to abolish capitalism must be completely pacifistic and disavow all violence - on the contrary, we need to be willing and able to defend ourselves against the violence of the ruling class.
Remember, the ruling class has almost all of the advantages, so we need to use the one thing we have: our numerical advantage. That means we need to build an inclusive, people-powered movement of the working class, based on solidarity.
A violent movement will deeply alienate and push away vast swathes of the population. Humans are innately repulsed and disgusted by acts of violence and brutality - especially for acts of killing innocent people, and even children, as you’re advocating here.
The only way that such a movement can hold together for any time is with pure anger, rage, and hatred. That is not the soil that a healthy, non-violent society can grow out of.
I would argue that in many ways the society we have today is because of how violent and brutal our past has been. If we want to get rid of exploitation and violence, we need to make the radical choice to break the cycle, and turn away from violence, except as a very last resort.
I’d be happy to explain my theory of change and share ideas for how we can end capitalism in a non-violent way - and no, I don’t mean just by voting every few years or whatever. Happy to chat. I really hope you’ll hear me out.
Much love, and solidarity forever.