That’s a very myopic view of things. Let’s talk about child labor, for one. Child labor is wrong. But no family, let alone families, went “You know what, this is wrong. We’re not sending Timmy to the mines, no matter how many of us starve from the loss of extra income.” Your solution is that: That people should bypass unionizing, bypass striking, bypass political engagement, and should just jump straight into starving instead of working these jobs.
Children died in the mines by the hundreds. Those who got out had their lifespans slashed by decades because of the harmful stuff they inhaled on a daily basis. And your argument is that there wasn’t anything better than that?
Dipshit, my argument was that there is a better world than that, and we found it by collectively empowering people, not starving an already disenfranchised group under the boot of capitalism. If you think a bunch of servers not making rent is going to magically bring about a utopia, be my guest, just, Jesus. I hoped better of you, I guess.
That never happened. There was never a time when worker rights were won at no cost for workers themselves.
Families were against child labor laws because they would be losing important streams of revenue. As a result, it took several decades to finally regulate the practice. In the meantime, children were exploited and died, wages were kept low because supply of children workers was always high, and mining and industrial companies thrived up to the peak of the gilded age and the subsequent Great Depression.
I mean, may be a hot take, but I don’t think people who usually send kids to work are such great parents. They maybe “have to”, because they can’t stop fucking and have like 15 kids, so of course Timmy needs to go to the mine, or else they couldn’t feed all of them
And people being selfish like that also translates to the server problem - if any underpaid server inherited a restaurant inherited a restaurant, do you think they would go “I’m gonna be different. I’m gonna pay my staff a fair wage, and allow them to have a union”? Lol, of course not. Probably all of them would think “I had to work for 2$/hour, now it’s your turn. I fucking to mine”. So yes, I do believe starving is the right solution, because I do not believe many of them care about a systemic change.
Buddy, all people can be selfish. That same argument applies to very industry under capitalism. And you think everyone starving is going to lead to some collective uprising? I’d love for you to read a history book; sure, starving people are truly the most altruistic.
That’s a very myopic view of things. Let’s talk about child labor, for one. Child labor is wrong. But no family, let alone families, went “You know what, this is wrong. We’re not sending Timmy to the mines, no matter how many of us starve from the loss of extra income.” Your solution is that: That people should bypass unionizing, bypass striking, bypass political engagement, and should just jump straight into starving instead of working these jobs.
What the fuck kind of analogy is that.
Children died in the mines by the hundreds. Those who got out had their lifespans slashed by decades because of the harmful stuff they inhaled on a daily basis. And your argument is that there wasn’t anything better than that?
Dipshit, my argument was that there is a better world than that, and we found it by collectively empowering people, not starving an already disenfranchised group under the boot of capitalism. If you think a bunch of servers not making rent is going to magically bring about a utopia, be my guest, just, Jesus. I hoped better of you, I guess.
That never happened. There was never a time when worker rights were won at no cost for workers themselves.
Families were against child labor laws because they would be losing important streams of revenue. As a result, it took several decades to finally regulate the practice. In the meantime, children were exploited and died, wages were kept low because supply of children workers was always high, and mining and industrial companies thrived up to the peak of the gilded age and the subsequent Great Depression.
I mean, may be a hot take, but I don’t think people who usually send kids to work are such great parents. They maybe “have to”, because they can’t stop fucking and have like 15 kids, so of course Timmy needs to go to the mine, or else they couldn’t feed all of them
And people being selfish like that also translates to the server problem - if any underpaid server inherited a restaurant inherited a restaurant, do you think they would go “I’m gonna be different. I’m gonna pay my staff a fair wage, and allow them to have a union”? Lol, of course not. Probably all of them would think “I had to work for 2$/hour, now it’s your turn. I fucking to mine”. So yes, I do believe starving is the right solution, because I do not believe many of them care about a systemic change.
Buddy, all people can be selfish. That same argument applies to very industry under capitalism. And you think everyone starving is going to lead to some collective uprising? I’d love for you to read a history book; sure, starving people are truly the most altruistic.
All big revolutions ever were born from suffering
Username checks out