• Junkers_Klunker@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    19 days ago

    You don’t deserve to be alive though, and it applies to everyone, even animals, if you don’t do the bare minimum you’ll die hot, cold, thirsty or hungry.

    • pipi1234@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      When you realise that we already produce (and throw away) enough food to feed the whole planet, then its evident that scarcity is fabricated.

      You mention animals, I would’ve thought we are better than them… Or at least we should try.

    • RiverRock@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      Yet I am to believe that Elon Musk deserves to be alive by a factor of several million times more than the people who grow my food?

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      The anti-natalist folks and the pro-natalist folks are clearly in some kind of competition to produce the shittiest ideology imaginable.

      Congrats for putting points on your side of the board.

    • davel@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      Good thing most of us don’t live like animals or think like you: we live in a society.

      Even in the US, at least some effort is made to not let the disabled who can’t care for themselves or financially support themselves die in the street. https://legalclarity.org/what-does-ward-of-the-state-mean-for-adults/

      The appointment of a state or public guardian is a measure of last resort, as courts prefer to appoint a family member whenever possible. State wardship occurs when the incapacitated adult has no spouse, willing family members, or a previously designated agent to take on the responsibility.

      • taygaloocat@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        Fair enough to support disabled people or those who definitely can’t work by themselves.

        But if we’ve all got oars on a boat and some people just choose not to paddle then they can get off the boat. I bet there’s a lot more rich people and trust fund babies not paddling than there are lazy poor people though.

  • Jax@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    18 days ago

    Totally unsurprising the amount of .mlers exposing how disconnected from reality they are.

    No you do not deserve to live. If you did, you wouldn’t need to find food or clean water to survive.

    • RiverRock@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      “Ugh, look at these delusional commies who think that the purpose of human society is to keep each other alive.”

      Judge us by our enemies

      • Jax@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        Congratulations! You’re still an idiot, and what I expressed is not social Darwinism.

        If you obtain food and water, you deserve to live. If you do not obtain food or water, you deserve to die. This is how life works, it is the reason human beings need to work together to survive. If I believed in social Darwinism I’d say something stupid like “those who collect the most food and water deserve to live the most”.

        Who am I kidding, you’re basically chatGPT. This is a pointless exercise.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          18 days ago

          Not an idiot nor an LLM. You’re taking issue with people saying that society should take care of everyone, and saying those who can’t secure food or water deserve to die. Feel free to clarify further, but read literally you are saying disabled people deserve to die, and that those who support social welfare for them are wrong. This is a social Darwinist take.

  • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    Thank you. I have been saying this for years (more than a decade now).

    Feminism fought for the independence of women from abusive husbands/partners, by making them earn their own money, so they can be free. I would not say that the majority of the population feels particularly free today, because the economic situation strangles them. There is a new dependency created in stead of the old one: The dependency from the employer. Especially with at-will employment, a manager or higher-up can fire you at any moment, which can cause homelessness and despair. These are not good things that we want to have.

    The logical consequence of fighting for freedom and equality is to fight for economic equality: People should be able to eat and sleep in peace, without having to worry about their circumstances tomorrow. “Equality” does not mean that everybody has the same amount, but that everybody has the chances they need to succeed in life.

    We need a universal basic income, or any equivalent of it such as handouts in various forms.

    • Spectre@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      Or, hear me out, we create a socialist government that make food, water and housing human rights and that works towards a communist world where everyone gets what they need and give what they can.

        • Bael422@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          Lolol, lets compare that to capitalism numbers. Don’t forget to compare suffering too, since everyone seems to overlook quality of life, injuries, and slavery, in favor of just one sliver of the many metrics of deaths. So, don’t forget to calculate the indirect deaths caused by capitalism too lol

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          Socialism has worked incredibly well in uplifting the lives of the working classes. In countries like Russia and China, life expectancies doubled. The incredible improvements in living conditions, democratization, and orienting society towards satisfying the needs of the many instead of profits for the few resulted in the greatest eradications of poverty in history. Socialism has worked, continues to work, and will increasingly work as time goes on, until it is eventually replaced by communism.

        • LobsterJim@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          Somebody only read the article title… Give the actual text a look to see it boldly claims the connection to political system is not strongly linked.

        • cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          Thats more a government thing than a communist thing.

          You coukd skip the government part and use other organizational systems in a constant experiment to find the full communism faster…

  • staciagrey@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

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

    • RogerMeMore@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      18 days ago

      That’s true, but sometimes it feels like life is just a series of obstacles we have to overcome. It’s not always easy to be grateful for every day. But I guess that’s what makes life worth living!

  • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    19 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
      0
      ·
      18 days 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
      0
      ·
      18 days 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
        0
        ·
        18 days 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
          0
          ·
          18 days 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
            0
            ·
            18 days 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
              0
              ·
              18 days 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 😊

    • curiousaur@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      Yikes you’re lame. I’ve got a kid, he’s happy as can be. Growing up on acres of forest and drinking well water.

      Have you tried to just stop being loser? Serious question.

  • VoxAliorum@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    19 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.

    • Michael@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      18 days ago

      I think it would incredibly more desirable for society to have a firm social safety net (housing, food, healthcare). We have the technology and means to do so without breaking a sweat.

      If we try it and society stagnates, we can always tweak it to incentivize certain types of work. Myself, I believe society would see vast improvements when people aren’t surviving and living in shambles. I believe many of our current issues would be quickly solved once we are broadly able to slow down and think for a moment.

      Deserving or not deserving doesn’t really factor into the equation. We need to create and build a world worth living in. I want to live in a world where people are more free, healthy, and safe - where work is directly benefiting our communities instead of people being forced to slave in hostile work environments to barely make it.

      • VoxAliorum@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        18 days ago

        In general I agree. People should be able to make informed life choices without pressure. However, I don’t think universal basic income is the solution (see below). In Germany we have no public university fees and you can get Bafög; which is a far from ideal conditional income enough to cover housing and food while you study. You have to pay a part back once you are done, but far from all (at most 50%; often less than that). I wouldn’t mind a study UBI.

        I am for social security and social services that allow you to make an informed choice of what you want to do. Beyond that I am for “you have to work”. But I am looking at “work” from an European perspective with all the protection laws in place and not an American perspective.

        The main problem with UBI (Universal Basic Income) is that while tests showed benefits (highly depending on countries), financing UBI is difficult. So far no larger country has completely adapted UBI at least partly due to that reason. Also, no study was long enough to see the “people are less incentivised to work” issue.

        • Michael@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          18 days ago

          Thanks for your response and engagement. I appreciated hearing your perspective as a German/European in contrast to my American one.

          We are likely in agreement that for a world to be going in a desirable direction, that we all generally need to find ways to contribute to society to make it a better place.

  • brownsugga@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days 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
      0
      ·
      18 days 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.

  • Eq0@literature.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    19 days ago

    Our society (with US at the forefront) is built on contradictions. On one hand, capitalism says you don’t deserve anything, you have to earn it. On the other hand, consumerism says you deserve every new gadget, luxury, treat.

    I believe both are false: everyone deserves a reasonable standard of living (UBI?), nobody inherently deserves more than that but it should be possible to earn it. And we should acknowledge that earning something is not a matter of moral superiority, but a combination of some effort and some luck.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      Capitalism is sold by liberalism as a grand system where everyone is on equal footing as buyers and sellers of goods and services, including labor. Consumerism is pushed by capitalists to increase the purchase of commodities beyond what would naturally happen (no need for a new phone every year), a sign of capitalism’s inefficiencies.

      Earning more through labor isn’t wrong, but the problem is that the system is built off of the theft of value created by workers, and parasitic capitalists sitting at the top siphoning off vast amounts of material wealth. Every sale of a commodity continues this vast siphon from the working classes to the capitalist class. UBI doesn’t fix this, what would fix it is moving onto socialism, where public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy, the working classes are in control, and production and distribution are largely aimed at satisfying needs, rather than private profits.

  • RiverRock@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    18 days 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
    0
    ·
    18 days 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
      0
      ·
      18 days 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.

  • venusaur@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    19 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.