• MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    24 hours ago

    You know, when i originally read this, the way i interpreted it was that he was saying that if you need to earn money to live you don’t deserve to live.

    I much prefer the version that is an indictment of the phrase “earn a living” as implying you don’t deserve to live if you aren’t “working” in the modern sense of earning money at a modern job vs doing what’s necessary to stay alive like all nature’s critters.

    • LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      “If you don’t earn money, you don’t deserve to live.”

      This is how I interpreted it and it definitely feels true, that’s how capitalism treats us.

      • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        For clarification, I initially read it to mean that anybody “poor enough” to have to work to earn money does not deserve to live. I.e., rich people are human, everybody else is subhuman.

        Your interpretation I saw a few moments later, and that the post was criticizing that phrase. Basically, the polar opposite of my first impression.

  • RiverRock@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    ITT: guys who probably consider themselves too smart for religion thinking in terms dictated by the church.

    “Deserving” and "undeserving* are made up concepts disconnected from any concrete reality, just shards of Christianity preserved in the amber of American civic religion and exported throughout the capitalist-dominated world. If you talk about who “deserves” this or that, you might as well be talking about who’s holy and who’s a sinner. The truth is, we are just animals who banded together tens of thousands of years ago to help each other survive. Many anthropologists say that society began when we started taking care of those who could no longer contribute as much physically: the old, the sick, the injured. But hey, if you want to be less socially evolved than a bunch of cave-dwelling hunter gatherers, that’s your choice. Just don’t expect the rest of humanity to entertain your rotten ideas about useless eaters, and don’t act surprised when you find yourself put out on the ice.

  • Kynn@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Well since it’s literaly us vs the planet (since we seem to be unable to regulate our society’s consumption of finite resources), the question is : does the planet exist for us to consume it ?

    The answer is no, but we’ll still consume it.

    Do we deserve to live ? Well outside of society, there is no reason we’re deserving it more than any living being. And sometimes I clearly wonder, when some individuals contribution is a big negative legacy for the next ones, and to the planet.

    Tbh I do not mean we (humans) do not deserve to live, but I clearly wouldn’t want it taken for granted, cause it is not.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      That varies quite a bit by country. Capitalist systems have no problems with destroying the world, but socialist countries are better able to plan production and distribution. You can see this in action in the PRC right now, and its major shift towards renewables and electrification at an astounding scale.

  • wowwoweowza@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Can I be the Genx here and just … yeah, we’ve always had to work for survival. Like each and every organism that find a niche. They are all working… even photosynthesis is a kind of activity.

    Good grief.

    All critters have to work. Think about it.

  • VoxAliorum@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Deserving to live and surviving are not the same. In the natural condition if you don’t gather or hunt, you have no food. You die. You do not deserve anything.

    Even in society you are not entitled to others working for you. However, in a civilised society we should provide for those incapable to provide for themself due to ethics.

  • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    I dont belong on this planet. That’s why I have to rent space until I mercifully pass away. Giving birth is child abuse and the most selfish act possible.

    • triplenadir@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      I semi agree with you, but the focus on “giving birth” vs “impregnation” seems misogynistic as fuck, especially with how much easier (cost, recovery time, risk of complications) vasectomies are than hysterectomies or even tying fallopian tubes.

    • Victor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Giving birth is child abuse and the most selfish act possible.

      Hard disagree. 🤷‍♂️ Surely depends on who you are and your means of providing for the child, both materialistically and emotionally. That’s just my opinion.

      • pipi1234@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        In some countries you are a disease away of financial bankruptcy. Good luck being able to 100% guarantee a living.

        Furthermore, this is the first generation that is worse off than the previous one, and its a trend that seems will continue.

        In the lucky event of being part of the select 3% that has financial security, no luxury can shield you from the pain the rest of the people is suffering.

        Maybe I’m a pessimist, but introducing a child into this roulette is not the kindest if you think about it.

        • Victor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          In some countries you are a disease away of financial bankruptcy. Good luck being able to 100% guarantee a living.

          Yup, but far from everywhere.

          Furthermore, this is the first generation that is worse off than the previous one

          Strong doubt 🤨 Which generation are we talking about? Lots of wars and plagues and stuff in history have made a generation of people worse off than their parents. That obviously didn’t stop us from procreating.

          Maybe I’m a pessimist, but introducing a child into this roulette is not the kindest if you think about it.

          Definitely are, or maybe more accurately a perspectivist, if that’s a thing. There are lots of countries and societies where bringing children up is not a “roulette” or “child abuse”. Everyone I know has good means and nothing but love for their children, in spite of (sometimes harsh) difficulties.

          And we are more emotionally aware of ourselves and our children in this generation than ever before. For the first time, a generation of parents are raising themselves and their children simultaneously. It’s very emotionally and mentally taxing but it’s a very good step in the right direction. We are listening to our kids and understanding their needs.

          Have a good day, try not to generalize a (personal?) bad situation. ❤️

          • pipi1234@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            While I agree with most of what you said, I cannot disregard how a swift change in politics can be introduced to satisfy the wims of the billonaires. We have recent and astounding examples (USA). Sadly I don’t trust humanity anymore. I don’t have a choice but to try to live my life the best I can, but I won’t force anyone else into existence.

            Have a good one you too my friend!

            • Victor@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              23 hours ago

              I on the other hand also agree with you now, that a swift change in politics can definitely upend an entire nation and affect several generations to come.

              But when we have children, we go into it with a lot of risk. The child might be born with disorders, develop crippling phobias, be bullied, get cancer. We never know what might happen. I might get run over by a car on my way to work tomorrow. But I can’t live my life thinking “what if” all the time. We have to keep going and have to keep fighting for a better life. Or work to maintain a good life we might already have.

              Or at least that’s a drive that a lot of humans have. It’s in the nature of the majority of people I would guess. Otherwise we wouldn’t be here, because our ancestors would’ve already cut the chain. Life is fuckin’ hard, quite frankly. And if that drive wouldn’t be there, it wouldn’t be worth it. 😅 Sharing it with people you love is what makes it worthwhile IMO.

              Thanks for a good talk 😊

  • venusaur@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    You don’t deserve to be alive in this kingdom, but the catch is there is nowhere to live that is not owned.

  • staciagrey@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 day ago

    You don’t, deserve it. Life is a privilege, everyday you wake up, is one more day to be grateful for.

  • brownsugga@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    That’s basically the core difference between the 2 political parties in the US currently. One essentially believes humans have a right to be alive, and the other does not. All the other policy differences kind of stem from that.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 day ago

      They don’t actually disagree, though. Both operate under the direct control of the wealthiest in the country, the capitalist class, and work to ensure imperialism persists and that their private owners continue making immense amounts of money.

  • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    It means by default you have to contribute to the society that you live in. And this is required in order for there to be a functional society to live in. It’s not an arbitrary rule, just a logical requirement.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Not true in capitalism, capitalists don’t contribute but instead serve as elaborate parasites plundering the wealth created by the working classes.

      • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        2 days ago

        Capitalism is just a way to organize work. Yeah, it’s a plenty unfair one. But we are just using money as a means to trade work for food/products/shelter/services. It ends up driving the society - getting people to make society work, and to enjoy the benefits of it.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Trade isn’t capitalism, though. Capitalism is a mode of production characterized by private ownership as the principle aspect of the economy. Capitalists essentially cast money out into the system, siphon the fruits of labor, and then repeat this process endlessly. Everyone does not enjoy the benefits of it, especially not those in the global south that are crushed by imperialism and unequal exchange.

          • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            2 days ago

            Capitalism is a form of trading. It is providing a service / lending resources, for a fee. It’s part of the notion that we use money to buy and sell anything and the economy works because everyone tries to make a buck and implicitly drive efficiency for society. It certainly has got out of whack now and needs some serious regulatory fixes. But for most people, they work to get money to buy what they need and as a result, they provide services, products, etc for others to buy what they need. It goes in a circle, and we end up helping each other. Yes, the rich siphon money off the top, but they don’t really affect the use or need of resources significantly. Their billions are just a number on a computer in a bank somewhere.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              No, you’re confusing trade itself for capitalism, and severely downplaying the immense siphoning of material wealth that goes on, especially at an international scale. Capitalists steal the value created by workers, workers are not on an even playing field with capitalists. They sell the only commodity they can, their labor power, while capitalists leverage their ownership of capital to fix labor prices around subsistence wages.

              Regulation can’t fix capitalism or save it from the tendency for the rate of profit to fall. We need to move onto socialism, where public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and production and distribution are oriented towards satisfying needs rather than profits.

              • Tja@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                11
                ·
                2 days ago

                The siphoning of material wealth occurs everywhere, including China, former Soviet union, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, etc. It’s not a capitalism thing, it’s a human thing.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Not necessarily. Capitalism functions by the following circuit:

                  M-C…P…C’-M’

                  Money is used to buy commodities, such as machinery, raw materials, and labor power, then production happens, then higher value commodities are the result of said production and sold for greater sums of money. M’ is fed back into this system, and M’’ is output at the end, over and over. The increase in value comes from unpaid labor, ie wages that don’t actually cover all of the value created, because capitalists cannot profit otherwise.

                  Socialist systems don’t have equal pay for everyone (that isn’t the goal to begin with), but also don’t have this system of capital ownership as the principle aspect of their economies and as such private ownership is phased out over time in these countries.

            • davel@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              You‘re not even trying. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

              Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their use for the purpose of obtaining profit. This socioeconomic system has developed historically through several stages and is defined by a number of basic constituent elements: private property, profit motive, capital accumulation, competitive markets, commodification, wage labor, and an emphasis on innovation and economic growth.

              • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                10
                ·
                1 day ago

                Says ‘you’re not even trying’ then just copies from Wikipedia.
                Maybe try thinking for yourself?

        • RiverRock@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Unless you’re one of the billions capitalism has decided it’s more profitable to slaughter, starve or plunge into a lifetime of poverty making t shirts and truck tires. Then you don’t get to enjoy shit.