The article is actually decently well written good-faith satire meant to address how poverty and hunger are inherent to capitalism as a system. The title was just too bold lol

  • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Sounds good at a glance, but when you look at the way he reaches that conclusion (that the threat of hunger is the only reason people are willing to work), and his solution (for a class of “intellectuals” like him to take charge) however, are just neoliberal swill…

    • abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Usually most sane people go “Hunger is used to extract labour from people so rich people can make money, so we should change this state of affairs” not “this is good and how we should continue, in an evil usually the preserve of 19th century British Imperial officials.”

      • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        How does the saying go? When your only tool is a hammer, every problem is a nail?

        The only tool he has is what capitalism gave him - the idea that people will only work if threatened with starvation, homelessness, or other punishment.

        The idea that the benefit of a community and society at large, and by direct extension - our own, could motivate people, or to be more precise, the idea that society would benefit everyone not just a “select” few, doesn’t even come in to consideration.

    • Dasnap@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Maybe they should build a city in the ocean where these intellectuals have full control. Maybe experiment with some cool drugs.

      • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Lmfao, I’d pay to watch them descend in to chaos as they insist on ranking each other by importance or whatever arbitrary measure of superiority they choose, because they simply can’t function otherwise, until they all end up dead from refusing to “lower” themselves to cooperate with “inferiors”.

          • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            If only… But I suspect whatever happens in November, it isn’t going to be pleasing at all (to me as an anarchist, anyway), especially because it isn’t themselves they consume, like the hypothetical “intellectuals” on the desert island would, but the rest of us, and those most vulnerable first.

    • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      his solution (for a class of “intellectuals” like him to take charge) however, are just neoliberal swill

      This is such a common pitfall that even self-described communists fall into it as well. When you hear people talk about a “dictatorship of the proletariat,” what they’re describing tends to devolve into “a class of intellectuals needs to guide the working class to the correct decisions” when questioned about what a “dictatorship of the proletariat” actually entails. Often they’ll try to justify it by saying it’s only temporary, but we all know how that pans out (see the USSR). This is why I consider myself an anarchist rather than a communist and regularly critique marxism-leninism.