I don’t like bringing ethics in what should be a uncomplicated case of pest eradication. Billionaires need to be deleted from our reality, it’s really just self-preservation. Whether or not they deserve anything, I leave to the clergy
I don’t think anyone “deserves” anything, but I do think immediate worldwide capitalicide would be the quickest and cleanest way to solve most of humanity’s current problems
While I’m pretty sure I would find some methods they used distasteful, in terms of outcome if find what the Chinese did with Puyi very poetic.
100% of them.
Yep
Yes.
There are no good billionaires.
If not that, strip of everything and forced into the worst manual labor of the industry they owned till they die.
Puyi: From emperor to gardener
(Better than just putting him up against the wall, I guess, right?)
They deserve to spend their remaining days in humble, honest work, perhaps as janitors, and to write three or four books reflecting on their mistakes and seeking forgiveness.
What China did to the last emperor was the way to go.
Do they deserve to die? That’s not for me to judge but they deserve to have their excess wealth confiscated and distributed for the betterment of society
Probably. They could have used their wealth for anything but they’re like dragons. Do you mourn for dragons in stories of knights slaying them?
Op probably does
Imagine we were monkeys in a forest and a few select monkeys were hoarding all of the food in their trees, letting most of it rot or go to little use aside from status and using it to bribe other monkeys to perpetuate the system. This same system that leaves other creatures to starve and suffer. This would be a deranged cancerous behavior, and even more terrifying when you consider it is almost guaranteed to pass down to the offspring. These pests would need to be driven off or eradicated as they would be a serious environmental threat. This is what must be done to billionaires, there just is no place for them in a logical system. They must be treated like rabid animals.
That’s fair.
I could also say you are a rabid animal that deserves cancer.
I could say your kid deserves to die from cancer or be shot.
Freedom of speech works both ways.
Freedom of speech does, but morality does not.
Money is blood. That is what its function is. It works by flowing. If it accumulates in the brain and stays, you die. If it stays in the heart, you die. Money works by flowing. Billionaires take such a large percentage of the money, that it breaks the function that money serves.
Billionaires literally care so much about hoarding their wealth that it breaks everything. They are like people who want to poke holes in a lifeboat, because they want everything. They are an existential threat to all civilization. Thiel left because America because he no longer has faith in its stability, in part, because he destabilized it due to his mental illness of wanting to have too much.
Do you enjoy kneeling in front of those who happily want end your civilization due to their mental illness?
Do you enjoy kneeling in front of those who happily want end your civilization due to their mental illness?
No, I don’t. But claiming someone deserves to die, celebrating their death, etc., is an extreme slippery slope that can be turned right back around on you. Like I said, you have the right to say whatever the hell you want and feel however you want. If someone thinks you deserve cancer, hopes you get cancer, or hopes your kid dies painfully in a school shooting, they are also entitled to feel that way, in the same way that you feel that way.
Difference is that they want EVERYONE to get cancer. They want EVERYONE to die. That’s what poking holes in a lifeboat does. And if you were in a lifeboat, and someone started poking holes in it, you would kill them if only in self defense.
You want to defend those who want to sink the lifeboat. I’m not sure why, but that doesn’t make you moral.
You want to defend those who want to sink the lifeboat. I’m not sure why, but that doesn’t make you moral.
Where the hell did I say I’m defending billionaires? I’m not. I’m defending everyone’s right to feel what they feel because you’re entitled to that, and I’m defending your right to free speech, which you have because of the First Amendment.
If you want to say, “All billionaires deserve to die,” that’s your right to say that. You are entitled to feel that way. I’m entitled to say, "Your kids deserve cancer, or they deserve to be murdered in a school shooting.
I mean, if my kid was a wealth hoarding, kid diddling, entitled, exploitative little shit, I’d wish some cancer on them.
Your error is that you’re punching down. If you can find a 12yo billionaire with a rap sheet like Donald Trump, fuck it, that’s a pretty terrible human being and it’s got a lot of years ahead of it. But most kids aren’t that vile. They’re not even in control of their own day to day lives, much less running governments and industry. Killing them solves nothing. Besides, they’re already getting cancer from the waste of the capitalist system, so you don’t even have to wish it; they’ve got it.
This post is in fact cancer.
Gathering up a billion dollars is a horrific strain to an economy. It is unnatural and impossible by any normal means … it is economic cancer. You could go back in time 2026 years and save the equivalent of $400,000 a year for those 2026 years and you STILL would not have a billion dollars. Its more than anyone ever needs and society should not tolerate gluttony and greed such as this. It is not natural.
You can say anything. You cannot create logic from nothing. He has a point - a purpose. He is saying cancer cannot be tolerated in a system because it kills the system. You’re saying random people can be killed in a system because… they can be killed? His has purpose of defending life, yours has no purpose.
…because they aren’t hoarding all the food?
You can, but you shouldn’t. If you came up to me and told me my nephew deserves to die of cancer, I’d tell you you’re an asshole and I want you to stay away from me and my family
but you shouldn’t
Selena Gomez, Taylor Swift, Kim Kardashian, and Oprah are billionaires. One could argue, “You shouldn’t say they deserve to die.” However, you do have the right to say that; it’s the First Amendment. So yes, if you feel that Selena Gomez or Tyler Perry deserves to die because they are billionaires, then you can say it—you have that right. At the exact same time, I have the right to say that your two young nephews deserve painful cancer, or that they deserve to die in a school shooting.
Nobody is denying you have a legal right to say it, it just doesn’t make any sense to say it, especially completely unprovoked. I’m not saying any of those celebrities should die, it’s just you saying that. I don’t know why you’re so obsessed with your right to wish kids dead. It’s disturbing
’m not saying any of those celebrities should die
Dude, here is my point, and this is the only point I’m making: the people in these comments are saying Tyler Perry, Oprah, Selena Gomez, and Taylor Swift deserve to die since they are billionaires. If they die, these people will celebrate their deaths, which is 100% okay—that is their right to say and do that. At the same time, however, people are allowed to say, ‘Your kids deserve cancer. They deserve to die in a school shooting.’ See how that works? If you think someone deserves to die, then people are also allowed to think you deserve to die. That’s all I’m saying, dude.
They already think I should die. You’re confusing your timeline.
People feeling that billionaire parasites that are already trying to kill us by poking holes in the lifeboat should be stopped from trying to kill us is the real order.
Also, your supposed self professed point isn’t your point. Or if it truly is, than you’re in im14andthisisdeep territory that isn’t even worth speaking out loud and your parents need to restrict your internet access.
If you think someone deserves to die, then people are also allowed to think you deserve to die.
Yeah I literally don’t care if you think or even outright say I deserve to die. It’s literally not a speech issue. It’s about the implication that one plans to act on those things.
For example, when a fascist or an anticommunist liberal says “PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S should die for being an anarcho-communist”, it’s their right to say that and, in isolation, I wouldn’t care. And I basically never do act on these threats. The issue is that there is both a historical precedent and current practice of fascists and anticommunist liberals acting on their threats.
If one says to me “PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S’s kids deserve to die of cancer in a school shooting”… that has no teeth in reality. I have no kids, and even if I did, one can’t give them cancer, and the person would just be mentioning school shootings to be edgy. It’s just some asshole babbling on the Internet.
And for this reason, I actually do understand why billionaires crack down on anti-capitalist speech in practice: because it will strip of their power, and possibly their lives if they keep up their horseshit. I simply do not care about billionaires and their monstrous desires. From their perspective, the threat posed by anti-capitalists is real…but billionaires have brought it on themselves, and they can easily fix this by voluntarily surrendering their control, telling their militaries to back off, and giving control of the means of production to the workers.
Like yes, I absolutely do want to make the “nice” billionaires you mentioned no longer billionaires. If they’re really so “nice”, then violence should not need to be an option.
Yes with the caveat if we have the power to enforce it they get the option to join the community lose all their wealth and work towards reparations to their victims. If we don’t have that power yet or they refuse then yes.
All? No.
But they should certainly all be contained. And in general, it’s pretty safe to assume they’re all guilty of a LOT of felonies, so incarceration and asset forfeiture are certainly viable options to explore. And if they manipulate the justice system to continue harming the world and extracting resources from regular people, death may be the only way to save the rest of us.
I’m not a fan of the death penalty as punishment for crimes. I’m more in favor of execution as a means of ending a direct threat against humanity. Hitler objectively deserved to be assassinated, for example.
There certainly are no good billionaires, and likely no redeemable ones. But murdering them isn’t the first option.
The top 1% are responsible for more pain and suffering than any other demographic. Even the holocaust wouldn’t have happened if the top 1% lobbying for fascism. Crimes commited by workers are often done as a result of alienation, these crimes committed by billionairs are commited from souless greed, knowing the full effect of their actions but chosing to do nothing about it.
Honestly, I can’t make up my mind about killing them, I’m not sure if anyone should be killed. Perhaps with enough therapy they can become a regular person again.
Even the holocaust wouldn’t have happened if the top 1% lobbying for fascism.
They’re the same picture.
