494
submitted 1 year ago by cyu@sh.itjust.works to c/socialism@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

The law protects private property.

If you defend the law, how would you overcome the wealth accumulation of billionaires through the legal construct of private property?

I am not defending the law, more pointing out the use of certain words have certain meanings, particularly for media companies to print them would be suicide if they said Bill Gates steals $30B. Whilst we may see that accurate, the current law doesn’t and thus they would be sued and give him more money.

I believe nothing will ever change as the vast majority of people don’t care, are numb to it, or don’t have time to care.

I don’t defend the law and in fact I’ll break the law as much as I can get away with.

I’m apathetic to life really and honestly dying doesn’t seem so bad as this place is a hell hole. And I am lucky enough to work my dream job, have a decent employer (< 10 staff, boss (lead engineer, owner) and works harder than me), average quality of life etc and yet I just can’t go on. Everywhere you look it’s just horrific humans committing horrific acts.

Then you have someone arguing about the semantics of words. Perhaps I’m too cynical now but I don’t see anything changing unless we have a mass revolt and well judging by how laws are changing over protests or how people view protesters I can hardly see a French style revolution happening.

[-] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Do the meanings of words vary or change based on rhetorical stance, cultural context, or historic period?

Are mainstream media and mainstream practices the precedent you understand as the one to guide your choices toward the objectives you identify as meaningful?

this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2023
494 points (100.0% liked)

Socialism

5182 readers
13 users here now

Rules TBD.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS