Is a manager at an industrial plant a tool of capitalism - what punishment
Is a software developer with investments in funds which are propagating capitalism a capitalist - what punishment
Whether he owns the means of production. Is he a shareholder in a corporation stealing value from the labor of the poor? Then he'll be affected when the mechanisms of stealing that labor are destroyed.
You can't fucking read.
oh okay so he wants to destroy the factory and then the effects of that trickle up to me. thats actually quite coherent. i just dont think it does any good for society.
Don't we technically all own the means of production if we have retirement funds, pensions etc which are invested in an index fund, which buys small parts of every company in the US (scope dependent on the particular fund)
well not destroy but maybe uh, seize, or something. something that makes me not own a share of the factory anymore.
Yes, and the punishment is the fucking same: the destruction of private property that he has a stake in, thereby destroying his mechanism of accruing wealth.
Yes, and the punishment is the fucking same: the destruction of private property he has a stake in, thereby destroying his mechanism of accruing wealth. Yes, I say this knowing it applies to me. There's no fucking "got you!" out here because whether or not I receive economic benefit from the movement is irrelevant to my advocacy for it.
I think we're getting distracted from the issue. Let's focus on the wealthy people having their houses burned down. How is this a proportional response to their crimes? Have their crimes been individually assessed to make this judgment?
What about the looting of large and small businesses in Chicago, Portland, Seattle - how is that justified?
we should kick them out of the houses and redistribute the bricks among the working class
1 Like
We have a stake in ownership of the means of production. We profit off the exploitation of labor. This isn't a fucking "gotcha." Advocating for my own stake in the means of production being made worthless doesn't fucking matter.
You're fairly well-off and white. You live in a decent neighborhood (this is speculation without actually knowing for sure). Shouldn't you be burning your house down?
Already said there is a distinction between private and personal property: if they own it for their source of housing and not as an investment, it shouldn't be done. But I don't really give a shit if it is, because the rich person has insurance on it and can buy a new one.
Looting of corporate businesses is just fine. Looting of businesses that exploit their workers and steal value from them is just fine.
I'm not actually gotcha-ing you, I'm asking where the qualification is for "owning the means of production" as at some point it crosses into the realm of "we should burn their houses down and destroy their businesses" - I want to know where that line is
Once again, evidence that you can't fucking read.
idk i do want to know about the world where the means of production is communally owned without a central monopoly on violence but hes just gonna tell me to read a book
So homes should be burned if they don't meet some threshold as residences (what threshold??) and also they should be burned if the person is rich (how rich??)
No it fucking doesn't. There is a distinction between personal and private property that I've made many times.
I don't own my house. I rent.
So all the businesses in Chicago were looted and burned because they were accruing wealth?
Isn't that a pretty low bar for a business?
They are used to rent and accrue wealth.
Never said this. Learn to read.
what if i declare my house as a business with one employee whose job it is to be contracted out to other businesses