927
submitted 1 day ago by ooli@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.ml
all 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] vga@sopuli.xyz 2 points 30 minutes ago* (last edited 30 minutes ago)

And I'm thinking "hold on, there aren't 2.7 trillion people here"

[-] RickAstleyfounddead@lemy.lol 8 points 7 hours ago

The billionaires are deliberately playing on the broken rail

[-] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world 33 points 1 day ago
[-] Eiri@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 day ago

I wonder what would happen. Let's say 10,000 people.

Let's say some extremist, highly organized group manages to successfully assassinate the 10,000 richest people in the world, and then disappears without a trace.

I'm guessing those people would all be succeeded by their next of kin. Would that cause a wave of change or...?

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 7 points 1 hour ago

No, it would not cause change. More would quickly take their place. The problem ultimately isn't the billionaires, but the system that allows them to exist.

[-] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 2 points 16 minutes ago* (last edited 14 minutes ago)

the system that allows them to exist.

Which they maintain (and rig further for their benefit) with their exorbitant wealth and power, let's not be coy.

Sure, killing them all isn't enough on its own, but abolishing capitalism will never happen as long as they, and their power, exist, and very few, if any at all will give up either voluntarily (to begin with, anyway), leaving us only one choice. They are what is destroying the planet and oppressing, and killing, millions of people, proactively and by choice, the "magic hand of capitalism" doesn't force anyone to exploit enough people to become a billionaire.

[-] P00ptart@lemmy.world 3 points 38 minutes ago

Depends. If it happens once, you're right. Nothing would change. But after the 2nd or 3rd time in a year? I think the people who inherit it will start seeing a little more charitably.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 52 minutes ago

Hence the necessity of Communist theory, otherwise random adventurism takes place.

[-] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 6 hours ago

I think a more efficient tactic would be to, once a month, execute the person with the highest net worth. Billionaires would be scrambling to get rid of their money

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 hour ago

Be better to just go ahead and achieve a Dictatorship of the Proletariat, any Capitalism that remains can be kept no bigger than can be crushed easily if it gets out of hand.

[-] hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 38 minutes ago

No dictatorship is ethical, the state is inherently unjust and oppressive. Also see: USSR, China, and North Korea.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 seconds ago

No dictatorship is ethical, the state is inherently unjust and oppressive

The Dicatorship of the Proletariat refers to a democratic proletarian government. The State is a tool by which one class oppresses others, hence why it is important for the proletariat to assume command.

Also see: USSR, China, and North Korea.

See what? Democratization?

[-] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

You're correct. It would cause some disruption and a lot of joy, but system would continue. It need to be overthrown entirely and new one built. That is, proletarian revolution is needed.

[-] vfreire85@lemmy.ml 6 points 23 hours ago

my boy/girl.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

Let’s say some extremist, highly organized group manages to successfully assassinate the 10,000 richest people in the world, and then disappears without a trace.

The problem is that these billionaires profit the most from a system of resource exploitation, but they do not benefit exclusively. We'd still have hundreds of billions of dollars in fossil fuel centric infrastructure that we'd need to replace and reconfigure. And that reconfiguration would require a national organized effort.

Ultimate, you can't just wave a wand and make Rich People Go Away. You need a national project that is both popular and efficient. One that reduces emissions while improving quality of life. You need a Green New Deal.

That's not something you can affect purely from subtraction.

[-] InputZero@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

You'd have to also threaten to assassinate their inheritors from taking the estate, or just take the estate. Either way that's violence. The question then becomes is it okay to use the Master's tools to build your own house, to which my answer is no I can't. I can use the Master's tools to tear down their own houses. I may be a bit too idealistic though.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 50 minutes ago

Have you read theory? I can point you to some good entry points, but essentially if you can smash the bourgeois state and create a Dictatorship of the Proletariat, you vastly democtatize society.

[-] zcd@lemmy.ca 91 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

A little billionaire cocktail math for you. Each billionaire emits in the neighbourhood of 1 million times more CO2 than the average person. So you streetcar just 3000 or so billionaires and that's the equivalent of reducing the earth's population by about 3 billion. Can't really think of anything greener

[-] tyler@programming.dev 35 points 1 day ago

Not that I don’t believe you but I’d love to cite this in future discussions, where did you get your stats from?

[-] tee9000@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

Thats their investments, not their personal use. According to your source anyway.

[-] Sbauer@lemmy.world -3 points 23 hours ago

The emissions from their investments ... thats the same as the emissions of your place of work or the emissions of the company you buy your stuff from. Lets blame that on an extremely small group of people instead of the billions of people who consume the products enabling them.

[-] tee9000@lemmy.world -1 points 20 hours ago

Yep there might be plenty we disagree with regarding their investments and their affect on the environment but we are just lying to ourselves to say people arent making a living due to some of those investments, having our lives enriched, and generally benefitting us in ways we would demand to keep if they were all magically erased.

Kind of useless to talk about this in any way to come to a sentimental conclusion though because we arent looking at a distribution of data to inform us what generates the most environmental impact and how much value we actually get from it each investment. Its just a big ambigious number until we look into it. Which we wont. Because nobody here actually cares enough.

[-] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

Honestly it’s a form of depoliticization because it’s not a serious proposal with any realistic chance of success. It distracts people from getting engaged with real politics and actually making a difference. And at the end of the day, isn’t that exactly what the billionaires want?

[-] tee9000@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

What proposal? I dont know what you are talking about.

I want truth.

[-] fin@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 day ago

I’ve seen this meme a while ago and I saw someone saying he wants to run over the billionaires back and forth to make sure they’re dead and I deeply agree with that.

[-] don@lemm.ee 35 points 1 day ago

Put a sniper on top of the cart in case the switchman gets bought out. Ain’t taking no chances.

[-] xintrik@lemm.ee 11 points 1 day ago

And when the sniper gets paid off?

[-] ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 16 points 1 day ago

Now there's 2702 billionaires to take out...

[-] RandomVideos@programming.dev 5 points 1 day ago

So killing them saves 1.00074 habitable biospheres?

that's a scarily large amount of billionaires

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Another consequence of inflation, I suppose.

[-] RogueBanana@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 day ago

That's 2700 more than what I would like

[-] sirico@feddit.uk 9 points 1 day ago

Billionaires brought the tram and dismantled it for car infrastructure

[-] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 day ago

I see no problem in this trolley problem.. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[-] idunnololz@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

B...but the shareholders! Won't someone please think of the shareholders. 😢

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago

2700? That's more than I thought.

[-] Rhaedas@fedia.io 14 points 1 day ago

Trolley problems usually have some conflict that makes the decision hard.

[-] onlooker@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 day ago

Exactly. There's no moral dillema here. I'm keeping the switch in the "left" position and welding it in place, just in case.

Add on the left workers rights, freedom, and real economic prosperity

[-] kungen@feddit.nu 11 points 1 day ago

We'd see some real trickle-down in that case.

[-] Sam_Bass@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

Lest we forget, trolley tracks are electrified sogo ahead and let ol jg gotrox step on one

this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2024
927 points (98.4% liked)

Memes

45219 readers
1646 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS