There are a myriad of news articles here on Lemmy that display the abhorrent influence billionaires have on our society (especially the US, where I reside). I consistently read comments where the posters appear hopeless and despondent of the situation, while others jokingly refer to the guillotine.
As for myself, I have recently found myself with a lot of free time on my hands after being laid off and want to gather ideas on what would be the best hypothetical route to solve this issue. Let me be clear: These are only THEORETICAL IDEAS and I do not condone any illegal activity.
Historical precedent: While I am not intimately familiar with the inner workings of the Occupy Movement, I do know that they were constantly attacked as being unorganized and lacking structure. It would be wise to not fall into the same pitfalls if those were accurate assessments.
Logical formulation: The foundations of the key points of the movement must be logically sound to withstand any external (and internal for that matter) scrutiny.
Motto: If a motto or slogan is chosen, it must be unambiguous so that attacks are directed to the movement, not the motto itself.
I am also aware that most people can’t spare any time to these kind of movements. Similar to the Texas seceding news, many commentators have noted that most Texans are living paycheck to paycheck and wouldn’t be able to dedicate any time to their cause. I would understand that would be same for this cause as well. However, since I have the time right now, I only ask for your ideas.
Broad issues: High cost of living (mortgages, rent, groceries, etc.) Inflation Homelessness
Philosophical underpinnings: Is there a Threshold of Greed? If so, what is too much wealth?
Possible means of reductions: Voluntary donation or renunciation of wealth past a certain point (highly unlikely) Taxation (also unlikely) Seizing assets (illegal and would most likely set a poor precedent)
It might also to organize an open database of billionaires with their respective fields (Forbes is closed) to help organize a boycott of some sort Though I suspect their fingers are in everything and it would be highly impractical.
Sorry for the word diarrhea. What are your thoughts?
I hear what you’re saying. I don’t see the methods you listed working under our government as our system has this flaw where the laws enforced tend to depend on which party is in charge.
That being said, organize your workplace. I’m personally fond of the Industrial Workers of the World as we are the only union that has an anticapitalist stance and our industrial organizing methods make it harder for employers to create division amongst the workers of a workplace (ie: separate unions for school teachers and school maintenance staff).
I don’t think movements succeed based on being organized. I think the core factor is people having nothing to lose.
Unions.
Anti trust enforcement.
Tax any loans using stocks as collateral. If they try to hide their wealth through an LLC, subject that LLC to a high wealth/business tax as well. Go full scorched earth on all billionaires.
Labor organizing, laws, and taxes. Same way we got what we have now but the work isn’t done.
we should just Go aroUnd acting lIke they are the best ever Landlords on the pLanet and there is nOthing unusual abouT them beIng the oNly people on earth familiar with thE concept of happiness, right fellow captive serfs?
I’m not sure, I kinda feel like we could use GUILLOTINES the way GUILLOTINES have been used historically, to spread that happiness around.
Taxation (also unlikely)
I think this is the most feasible way, and it work relatively well in other Western countries than the US. They still have billionaires, but fewer due to higher taxation. If put in place through referendum, it also creates a basis for societal approval of stripping very wealthy people of their excess wealth, lowing the risk of widespread revolt.
Focus on making the poor people richer instead. Then you’ll realize things are going pretty good.
Hard to make the poor people richer when the rich are taking an increasingly large share of the pie.
Actually with the wonders of math it’s not. Because if the pie gets bigger faster than their portion increases, we all win.
And, as it turns out, the poorest people in the world are indeed getting richer.
Resources are ultimately finite, regardless of method of extraction. The poor people would get richer faster with better distribution and research supports basic reasoning that the pie would get bigger if distribution was better.
Not sure which resources you’re referring to that would be at their limit such that poor people can’t get any richer.
Also no, all the times the economic system has been built around optimizing distribution, production has dropped to almost zero. Under redistribution schemes, the poor tend to die horribly.
I reiterate: All resources are ultimately finite. There is however more than enough for all if extracted sustainably and shared somewhat equally. Under redistribution schemes, the poor stop being poor because having basic needs met increases social mobility. Also production increases because it is in many cases artificially restricted due to the consumers being too poor to buy the things they want and/or need.
Money is infinite though. The wealthy people know how to tap into all the manipulative ways of increasing their own wealth. What we need is education for everyone to know how to do this. But of course a problem with that is that if everyone is wealthy, no one is wealthy because wealth doesn’t exist without something to contrast it with, which are the poor financially-illiterate people who do all the hard labor which generates wealth for their CEOs. Which is why the wealthy people don’t want to educate poor people on financial literacy.
Taxes! But different. This channel is very informative:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEdx1BIb1x0
The first Episode of Sabrina Live! is called How the Rich Don’t Pay Taxes. All the rich need to do is use three simple steps: “Buy, Borrow, Die.” In this episode, Rich Kid attempts to buy a $50 video game after purchasing a $1 Pokemon card. He then leaves his Pokemon card to his son - Rich Kid II.
Lol you can delete our posts all you want.
The answer is unanimous. it doesn’t need to be written down. We all know the answer:
G U I L L O T I N E S .
Wait, who is deleting posts? Edit: Nevermind, it’s the lemmy.world mods.
Make wealth hoarders fear for their lives
To help our poor billionaires I will take one for the team and help them reduce their burden, for a small administrative fee, I will take ownership of 10% of their fortune, I’d imagine there are several other people who gladly would agree to help in slmilar ways.
But then you’d be a billionaire aswell and would need to be excecuted for the horrible person you are.
Voluntary donation or renunciation of wealth past a certain point (highly unlikely) Taxation (also unlikely) Seizing assets (illegal and would most likely set a poor precedent)
Part of the issue is that they see those as more or less the same thing.
As far as I’m concerned, taxation is the answer. Brackets seem to work pretty well. The issue is tax havens. Here in Norway, the current government raised taxes a bit on the wealthy, as one would expect going from a conservative liberal bunch to a center-left-ish one. A bunch of wealthy people promptly took their ball and fucked off to Switzerland, after bitching and posturing and whining in public, eagerly helped by the news media.
Unfortunately it seems that while I consider this obviously selfish parasitism, a lot of people… don’t. After all if you’re rich, surely you deserved it(!)
So many thoughts on this. I’ll try to parse some out, one post at a time.
Part of the problem is the standard of legality. Late-stage capitalism is defined by the state serving the ownership class rather than the public. It’s why the state cares very little about wage theft, or addicts dropping dead from opioid overdose, or homeless freezing to death in sub-zero Minnesota but are arresting immigrants who are otherwise well-behaved (and paying their taxes) or raiding repair shops that fix iPhones without an Apple authorization. It’s why media agencies are so worried about piracy even as they try to lay off their development teams if they can be replaced with AI software.
Laws and the legal system work for the ownership class, not the public. Any legal efforts to strip billionaires of their wealth, or even reduce their profits is going to quickly get neutered. This is why the protections afforded by the fourth, fifth and sixth amendments of the Constitution of the United States have been thoroughly gutted with carve-outs. It’s why asset forfeiture is not only a thing, but takes more from Americans than burglaries.
And this is why law enforcement is already attacking mutual aid organizations based on licensing issues, because it’s not actually illegal but facilitates other threats to the ownership class, such as labor actions. There is no rule of law in the US. Your rights go only as far as your lawyer’s means to enforce them, and if you’re depending on a public defender, they just don’t have the time or funding.
The ownership class will (according to Marx) tremble before a communist revolution because we will have ruled out all other alternatives, though we may try a fascist autocracy and a massive genocide machine to dispose of all the underclasses, first.
And that’s the problem. The Holocaust was legal too. Leaving workers hungry and cold to the elements during the Great Depression was totally legal, and at the time communism as per the Soviet Union was looking pretty good to those of our great grandparents who weren’t Carnegie or Rockefeller. This is not our first rodeo. What the state likes (id est, what is legal ) is not a fair moral standard. Nor is what religious ministries like (id est, what is sin ). We have to decide for ourselves what is right and wrong, and if we’re willing to die for our pacifistic standards when law enforcement decides we are intrinsically unlawful
This is why some are arguing the climate crisis warrants resorting to violent sabotage (say, blowing up oil pipelines) since the alternative is to let industry pollute us to global catastrophic risk (of extinction). If you want a sustainable civilization, if you want wealth and power distributed fairly, if you want a public-serving government, then you’re going to have to give up on lawful action. And if you want to stay within the confines of law, you’ll have to give up on equality, a functional state or a future.
Great reply, thank you. OP points out that the situation appears hopeless and I often leave feeling that capitalism has truly captured all the regulators and is now free to grind all value out of society. Assume we get a decent amount of the population on the same page what is the next step? Is there no room for reforms? I have a feeling that only when public discussion consistently prioritizes human well-being above all else can any progress be even attempted.
Great answer. I’m getting strong Thoreau Civil Disobedience vibes.
Guillotines
