ah yes, the life i yearn for
Oh, so we let Capitalism destroy the planet and the ability to easily grow crops …and then resort to running around in the heat doing cannibalism?.. do we know they were billionaires at this point, or is there just still enough meat on them to make them worth hunting?
That’s the problem with post-Capitalist clarity, it leaves you in a really painful situation, and there may be no other destination possible. It nay be the only place Capitalism ends.
That doesn’t even address whether there’s a market in human meat and wealthy traders… And how Capitalist that market started. Oh Capitalism may not have ended yet in this scenario…
I’m not against but I feel like we have to establish boundaries. Like how rich is rich game? Is a weathy dude huntable? What about people that won the lotery? I Imagine billionaires are the better target right?!
it’s not about vengeance. it’s about toppling the figureheads that gatekeep the means to the utopia within reach.
how many have to die? i guess as many as it takes until we see progress.
wow calm down Adolf
Anyone without capital is off limits
As with any hunt, the biggest ones are the most impressive. Nobody’s going to commend you for taking down a scrawny one when there are billion point bucks out there.
So it’s like the purge but with points or is it like the french revolution?! (Not that they are were very different lol)
Just want to make sure of the rules so I don’t kill my neighbour accidentally
I would like to point out that this is just what robin hood is
Feel like your chances of seeing one of the dozens of people who hold like half the wealth in the world is pretty slim on the street.
ah but we know who they are no? that means we can find them.
I hope your bow skills are enough to kill their armed bodyguards first.
i can learn
me too
During revolutionary conditions a lot of bodyguards end up, you know… taking stock of where their class interests lie, if you know what I mean.
definitely an angle
I bet a couple dead goons would convince the rest to find safer employment. They do that job because they know there’s very little risk protecting some rich asshole
Most of them are paying teams of retired Navy seals to protect themselves.
Good, I like my toys durable
I hear there are ways to track their private jets…
On a completely unrelated note: Ukraine has been modding off the shelf drones for aerial recon and munitions deployment.
I just rewatched some Hawkeye episodes. I’m down with this. brb got to make some more special arrows.
Thank you for your important research.
But what are you going to eat once you run out of rich people?
the food that i bought/exchanged from my local farmer for a fair price
And what are you going to pay him with?
we’re not going to pay him because he didn’t farm it. we’re going to pat the robot on the head. we’re going to do R&D and implement the technologies that actually work for the people not the few.
Rolexes
if money is not existent at this point, i will, as mentioned in my original comment, exchange it for something else, be it other goods, or my services as a mechanic, electrician, metal worker, or IT-support (yes i know, kind of an outlier)
If you think a complex, modern society can be run on barter trade, I have some bad news for you.
well then, prove me wrong
No complex society has ever been run without money. While that’s no proof, that is impossible, I don’t care to be part of this particular social experiment.
I get the violent rhetoric, I really do. But, at the same time, I can’t help but feel like more people would be more amenable to social reform that benefits the little guy to the mere detriment of the rich, rather than murdering them horribly. I could be wrong, but doesn’t history teach us that violent revolution more often just begets more violence than actually solves problems?
Ok but the rich, and tgerefore powerful will block said reform or even weaponize it. We’re at 40 years of losses for the little-guy. We’re down to the bone and they’re still cutting while the pigs still feed at the public through
but doesn’t history teach us that violent revolution more often just begets more violence than actually solves problems?
Nope! Look at the life expectancy increases under socialist countries, they mathematically have less death!
Also compare red terrors casualty numbers to standard operating casualty numbers. Like 20 million people die of capitalism caused deprivation a year worldwide today.
I mean, Kamala is running on policies that would help the little guy. And she might lose to guy who SA’s women and said he could shoot someone in the street.
If she wins and we get a peaceful transfer of power, then I’ll have more faith in your dream.
But right now, it seems like violence is what the masses crave over social reform.
I agree 100%. I’m as left as probably most people here, but I just don’t understand why the first course of action is to claw the opps eyes out.
I understand. I throw obscene amounts of money at the cash black hole that is rent. I understand entirely how people think that people who make money simply by sitting on assets they own and otherwise provide nothing to society should be, ahem, obliterated. I just think it’s still possible to obliterate them with regulations instead of actual murder.
counterpoint:
in all seriousness, no it doesn’t. that’s whitewashing by liberals. good revolutions are often still violent. because guess what, if you want to challenge power, power doesn’t just fucking let you do whatever you want.
power doesn’t just fucking let you do whatever you want.
No, but power can be subverted. Maybe I’m hopelessly optimistic, but I think there’s still a non-violent solution.
not if history is any indication.
Now I need to see a photo shop of a Post brand cereal named Nut Clarity, with picture of fuzzy almonds floating in milk.
Why would you us a bow? Range is poor, and lethality is also low, esp. with the access the the ultra-wealthy have to medicine. When you hunt deer with a bow, you can usually expect to have to follow a blood trail, as it’s rarely an instant drop.
Use a .300 Winchester magnum from 1000 yards; at that distance, you still have about 850 foot-pounds of energy, which is roughly double a 9mm at point black range. With the right ammo, that’s more than enough to get the job done. You probably want a combined mechanical and ammunition accuracy of about .5 MOA range though, so that you have deviation of less than 6" at that range. It’s a challenging shot, but it’s definitely doable if you know your holds and can call the wind.
Because it’ll probably hurt more.
Bows can be roughly created from easily available materials, making it impossible to ban the ownership of.
Banning ownership becomes a game of catch. Use whatever you have: 7.62x51mm, arrows, rocks, ect.
And you can swap scopes depending on, uh, context.
You shouldn’t need to. .300 Win mag is long action, so you’re going to be using a bolt action rifle. There’s not going to be too many contexts where you’re going to want to swap out the scope for anything other than fairly long range.
Lol!
This fantasy you people have is nothing but sociopathy.
What “rich” are you trying to kill and eat? Just, anyone that you have judged to have more than you have? It’s not like you will be able to get to the people at the very top. And what, you just murder those that you have labeled “rich” along the way?
My brother makes more than I do. MUCH MORE. I would never want to see him and his family murdered by douche bags out of jealousy for the things he has been able to work hard to achieve. And he has worked hard all of his life to make it to where he is now!
Do you guys have some sort of test to see who should and shouldn’t be murdered just because they have more than you do?
You guys are fucking sick in the head!
Removed by mod
What no theory does to a mf.
But seriously, you got it wrong. We would all prefer if things go nonviolent, but that is not possible.
Not only that but the post is just a joke, adventurism is not something that’s incentivized in leftist groups/movements afaik.
And your rethoric about “anyone that have more than I do” is completely wrong. The problem is not someone earning more than other people, but the bourgeoisie, the ultra rich, the ones that lobby for their interests, that buy and sponsor politicians. Anyone else is much closer to the poor than they are to the rich.
Also this has nothing to do with jealously. You should read some Marx to at least understand what you’re trying to criticize and oppose. Or at least watch some Marxist creators like Second Thought, Yugopnik and Hakim.
But the clarity is getting shot in self defense
The true clarity is class consciousness :3
You’re only allowed to have post-nut clarity in capitalism if you have earned a lot or better yet once you have a stable passive income. Otherwise, it’s money-horney talking in you.
And most of the days that’s what lemmy sounds like “I never had sex, this attractive guy has slept with too many girls, we gotta make sure there’s an equal distribution of girls among all of us”.
We can still talk about how that situation is unfair, but you’ll never convince me that you’re neither jealous nor horny.
This is vibes based politics.
No, an exploited class noticing their exploitation and some dude thinking he is entitled to having sex with women are not the same actually.
I don’t know. Personally I’m a fan of Piyu style reeducation (or at least a more modern and humane version of it).
