I have no idea who this is, and thought It was just some dude saying some based shit... Then I read the blurb at the bottom...

I'm guessing he meant this ironically?

This is Democracy Manifest!

But trans people would get healthcare too and we can't have that. /s

We have the right to lofe liberty and the persuit of happiness.

Not having proper healthcare coverage is literally against that right.

A lot of people think that specifically is not the government's duty, though. You'd have to first convince them that the government's duty isn't simply to defend against invasion, or enforce the will of the people, or whatever else they believe.

I think it could be argued that you have a right to a "purpose". For some people that may be a job. And some may choose to not have a purpose. But no one should be denied a purpose if they want one - even if it involves goals they will never succeed at.

Jobs are fine. It’s for-profit companies that’s the problem. Why does a company need profits (outside of maybe emergency capital)?

No company needs to profit by billions/trillions.

Humans find jobs for themselves and their community all the time, but not fucking bullshit jobs like data entry technician or call center technician.

I fucking hate cleaning, but I will happily help a friend or family member clean their house or their apartment because we thrive in a community.

Not getting the humanity squeezed out of us for a few cents more.

Someone has to grow the food. That's a job.

Either nothing humans do is natural, or everything is.

Democracy and human rights aren't natural. Capitalism isn't natural. Or they both are.

People do like to work, the caveat being that they generally don't want to work with virtually nothing to show for it. The modding community is massive, and they almost never get paid. People love to bake, or draw, or garden, or volunteer, all without fiduciary compensation.

But when people make it where they have to "get a job" to survive, the love of the labor disappears.

This. As automation increases, fewer of us should have to work. A significant issue with the Soviet Union and their legendary inefficiency is that every one had the right to a job even if there were no jobs to be done. Leading to them creating unnecessary intermediary positions at every level of the system.

Basic income, sure. And people should be educated. But beyond that, encourage the people who don't need to work to pursue art or other ends. Get them involved in community activities. But work towards a society of leisure if possible.

And they’re making damn sure that keeps happening.

bOtH siDeS

In the Middle Ages and the Ancient era in many places the nobility were seen as also being stewards of the underlings and HAD to make sure they didn’t completely fall into shit.

This strikes me as a touch revanchist.

Middle Ages / Ancient Era nobility operated on a patronage system for their courtiers and military officers, sure. But they obtained the surplus to satisfy the duties of the patrician class by looting and pillaging neighboring city-states or by taxing the working people inside their domain.

Even the original robber barons funded medical research, and built theaters and libraries and other cultural stuff for the society they lived in.

They bought bread and built circuses for the artisan class that they sought to cultivate in their immediate vicinity. But their largesse was very geographically limited. The farther from the center of power you got, the more you suffered and the less you benefited.

Communities on the periphery were as heavily exploited then as they are now. Only the limits of technology kept that frontier relatively close by, with innovations like Roman roadways and early Medieval shipbuilding technologies pushing those frontiers outward.

The Vikings were not funding medical research in Angland. The Romans were not building libraries in the Black Forests along the Danube. The Columbian Era Spanish were not bringing Renaissance art and culture to the Aztecs and Incas or sending over architects to build beautiful stained glass churches in what would be Texas and Florida.

I don’t think even Hitler held the land and the earth and humanity in general with that level of contempt.

The Scorched Earth tactics of the World Wars were pioneered a century earlier. General Custard and King Leopold II absolutely employed wholesale destruction of the agricultural basis of local communities as a means of enslaving or exterminating native people.

The English and Portuguese would employ opium addiction as a means of expanding their empire along the Pacific Rim. The French would make an industry of trapping and killing wild game that wiped whole species out of the New World. Their commercial farming practices in Africa and Southeast Asia would obliterate local biomes for private profit.

This is just more of the same short-term profit oriented expansionism. The machines are bigger and the damage more expansive, but the intent and the incentives are all the same.

while there's good points, the last sentence is out of place.

That guy was contempt manifest. In the end he ordered the destruction of the oh so beloved country

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nero_Decree

Guy who became a doctor: leave me alone, sick people! You don’t have the right to access medical expertise taught in part by your taxes!

There is a fallacy here. You are not making a specific person's labour a right, but making a type of labour a right. That labour can be provided by many people, each of whom could theoretically have the right to refuse. That labour being a right means that there is some mechanism that ensures a person gets it. E.g., right to an attorney.

Also, many many existing rights require other people's labours. The right to a fair trial in the US would require a judge, a lawyer, and 12 members of a jury.

A right isn't something others force you to do. It's something that can't be taken from you.