this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2024
321 points (94.7% liked)

Ask Lemmy

27225 readers
2469 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

While it's very unlikely that someone has a definitive answer, this question popped into my head after the assassination of the UHC CEO and it's been bothering me that I can't shake off this feeling that more is likely to happen (maybe not in higher frequency but potential).

Usually I could provide counter-arguments to myself in a realism/(should I buy apples or oranges comparison) kind-of sense but this one I feel more unsure about.

I wish I had more diverse exp in systems analysis as these kinds of questions that linger in my head really irritates my OCD brain as I just want to know what's the most likely answer.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] IDKWhatUsernametoPutHereLolol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 173 points 1 week ago (3 children)

As John F Kennedy said "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable"

Either we fix this peacefully through the democratic process, or people are gonna riot.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 54 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Billionaires: yeahhh I'm just going to buy all the media, all the politicians, and make sure enough of my guys win that they stop any legislation that would cost me anything. Nothing could ever go wrong with effectively taking away people's choices right?

I'm thinking all we have left is roit. We've already lost the democratic process through propaganda outlets and bought and paid for candidates a while ago. There is no party for the working class. There is a party that likes to talk big, but when push comes to shove they don't do shit and have their chosen "enemy of the term" to pop up and take the fall to stop anything from passing.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] recursive_recursion@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable"

I'm a fan of this belief because it provides hope in that with the increase of peace and harmony, humanity could course-correct towards a realized utopia.

The publicized hope of increased violence is a scary indicator that we're approaching closer to commonly associated fiction-based dystopias🫠

Blurry image of an anime girl holder her head with the caption "I hate it when a teacher puts '?' on my paper, like...I don't know either

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

John F Kennedy said that at a time when the majority of Americans weren't overweight, undereducated, overworked, utterly dependant on their cars (which need the roads maintained by the government to work), and addicted to their phones. I don't think Americans have the physical or mental capability to wage an effective protest like what happened in the 20th century.

[–] weeeeum@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Considering the US (and most modern militaries) struggle against insurgencies and irregular militia (Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam) there's no reason to doubt the american public.

Much of the Vietcong were uneducated, underfed, impoverished rural farmers but they were a devastating force to GIs.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 134 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Feels too good to be true. It's only one shooting.

Now if some second evil CEO were unfortunately victimized, I might be tempted to call it a trend...

[–] adarza@lemmy.ca 37 points 1 week ago (4 children)

two is just a mere coincidence; but three would be the start a pattern or trend.

[–] moody@lemmings.world 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And if there were FIVE evil CEO's suddenly victimized, why we could have a movement!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] HenriVolney@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It happened in Europe during the "years of lead", mostly in Italia, France and Germany.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sabin10@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I feel like victimized is the wrong word for someone reaching the find out part of fucking around.

[–] 5wim@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 week ago

It was tongue-in-cheek, along with "unfortunately"

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] xylogx@lemmy.world 79 points 1 week ago (5 children)

“If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.”

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] veganpizza69@lemmy.world 45 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It's certainly part of the catabolic stage in the system's decay. Due to many reasons, both at the input side and the "drowning in waste" side (example: GHGs waste causing climate destabilization), growth is going to falter which means that the "sharing" strategy of the rich, of the oligarchs, is going to stop working. You may know it as "grow the pie" (instead of "share the pie"). The rich get richer, the rest get poorer, and there are going to be a lot of poor people. That means a lot of desperate people and a lot of people with nothing left to lose.

What you have to watch out for is perhaps two strategies that can stop this:

  1. Scapegoating: vulnerable minorities and more. The rich of a certain ethnicity may become the scapegoats, instead of .... you know, ALL of that class. This would be a misdirection of attention.
  2. Jingoism, chauvinism and various forms of ultra-nationalism. This would be a misdirection of violence... instead of "punching up", it becomes "punching the foreign threat", which means war.
  3. Combined 1 & 2. It's usually called fascism.

Something to print:

On a related note, I really liked the recent season of "Arcane" (both seasons are great). https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11126994/

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 33 points 1 week ago (6 children)

The rich have exceptional resources to protect themselves. Money is just another form of power.

For instance, even in a doomsday scenario (for them) of the French Revolution, the rich will have personal security guards. These people will be paid very well (relative to the general population), which will keep them loyal enough. They will eat at secure restaurants (similar deal), and enjoy activities in secure locations.

Beyond that, you already see the rich buying private islands (Larry Ellison) and preparing for an uprising (Peter Thiel).

But if you let your imagination run wild, they can even distort the blame, and set up patsies. Owning the media and controlling the narrative (propaganda) is highly effective and already happening in earnest. Plenty of blame is being shifted to immigrants and (because it works, somehow) LGBT+ groups.

I would even say the UHC CEO is himself a fall guy. The buck doesn't stop at the CEO. There is a step above him. The board of directors is responsible, and they will replace him with another just like him. They are the ones that ultimately choose the direction.

[–] hperrin@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't think the guy making 12 million dollars a year off the suffering of the poor counts as a fall guy.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] eran_morad@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago

One can hope.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Just curious but are we heading towards an "eat the rich" society?

I guess we should be, but that's just my personal opinion.

Realistically, no. The people have clearly expressed how dumb they are and what they desire in the November election. They want dumb Republicans, they get asshole CEOs. I don't see it any other way.

Honestly, I believe voting is the best way to bring change about a society that wants to change. It's just that I have given up the thought that the US wants to change in the direction that I would go. So no, it's not gonna happen.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They voted for Trump, but not because they actually wanted a bunch of asshole CEOs in power. The electorate wanted real transformative change; they're looking for anyone who can offer even a hope of some bold transformative change. The only party offering real change right now is the Republicans. Democrats just want to offer a few piddly means-tested tax credits like they usually do, while doing absolutely nothing to actually rein in corporate wealth and power. Kamala's flagship domestic policy was a $25k home tax credit that only a sliver of the populace would be eligible for; and it would only serve to bid up housing prices.

Like it or not, the Republicans did actually have answers for people. They aren't good or noble answers, but they were answers. Democrats were too chickenshit to run on a platform of "CEOS are ruining your life, we need to come down like the hammer of God on the greedy oligarchs." The Republicans in turn ran on a platform of, "the reason your life sucks is a bunch of DEI programs are putting unqualified people ahead of you. We'll end that. Illegal immigrants are taking your job opportunities, and we'll deport them all. House prices are too high, so we'll deport 20 million immigrants and lower them!"

Those are abominable answers to the problems we face, but they actually had an answer, however evil and ultimately unproductive. Yes, obviously deporting millions of immigrants won't actually help people, but it doesn't matter. The Republicans actually had an answer to the question, "what transformative change will you do to improve the lives of Americans?"

Democrats had no answer. And for that, they lost.

People are hungry for dramatic change. They feel the system is rigged, and they are right. Democrats were too cowardly to take up that message and push for change against the corporate class, and that left Republicans as the only party offering any real change.

You don't need to radically transform society to want change; the country already clearly wants change. The fundamental problem is the only ones offering change are the Republicans.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I am surprised people have been tolerating the fuckening so well so far.

We live in a richest country and majority life is shit.

Fake news endlessly tells us to just accept it.

A dead CEO is a good message, it is provocative and it got people going.

School shooting copy cats were many... One can only pray that mentally unstable people can find a better targets going forward since shootings ain't stopping.

Might as well be these parasites.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Linktank@lemmy.today 20 points 1 week ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] tomatolung@sopuli.xyz 20 points 1 week ago

Look to history for some answers.

The Denver Post had a opinion piece that talked about how America has seen something like this before.

The Gilded Age, the tumultuous period between roughly 1870 and 1900, was also a time of rapid technological change, of mass immigration, of spectacular wealth and enormous inequality. The era got its name from a Mark Twain novel: gilded, rather than golden, to signify a thin, shiny surface layer. Below it lay the corruption and greed that engulfed the country after the Civil War.

The era survives in the public imagination through still resonant names, including J.P. Morgan, John Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie and Cornelius Vanderbilt; through their mansions, which now greet awestruck tourists; and through TV shows with extravagant interiors and lavish gowns. Less well remembered is the brutality that underlay that wealth — the tens of thousands of workers, by some calculations, who lost their lives to industrial accidents, or the bloody repercussions they met when they tried to organize for better working conditions.

Also less well remembered is the intensity of political violence that erupted. The vast inequities of the era fueled political movements that targeted corporate titans, politicians, judges and others for violence. In 1892, an anarchist tried to assassinate industrialist Henry Clay Frick after a drawn-out conflict between Pinkerton security guards and workers. In 1901, an anarchist sympathizer assassinated President William McKinley. And so on.

As historian Jon Grinspan wrote about the years between 1865 and 1915, “the nation experienced one impeachment, two presidential elections ‘won’ by the loser of the popular vote and three presidential assassinations.” And neither political party, he added, seemed “capable of tackling the systemic issues disrupting Americans’ lives.” No, not an identical situation, but the description does resonate with how a great many people feel about the direction of the country today.

It’s not hard to see how, during the Gilded Age, armed political resistance could find many eager recruits and even more numerous sympathetic observers. And it’s not hard to imagine how the United States could enter another such cycle.

[–] Sabre363@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I really fucking hope so, the world has too many rich morons in charge and we genuinely need to do something about it right now if we want to have a planet anymore.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 9 points 1 week ago

They love preaching social Darwinism but are they ready for some natural selection 🐸

[–] RangerJosie@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It always does. The lords get too greedy, and the peasants revolt.

The US has done an exceptionally good job of propaganizing that instinct out of people. But the material conditions of American Life have brought the sentiment roaring back.

Basically there are 2 paths. Either way is going to be a revolutionary upturning of the status quo. Either there will be another FDR who reins in the worst impulses of Capital. Or the citizenry will do it for them.

That or GovCo goes full authoritarian to control the population. But that has the potential to spark a civil war. After all, we have more guns than people to use them. A few massacres around the country would spark a real resistance.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 8 points 1 week ago

We know one thing for sure is that these parasites and their owners will never stop the grift on their own.

Also Trump ain't FDR...

[–] Atom@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

You know the saying, "death and taxes"? Well, they stopped paying taxes.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

No... Lemmy is, but Lemmy is not indicative of society at large, hell, the Internet is not indicative of society at large.

Look at the last US election, if we were going to Eat the Rich would we have elected a putative billionaire candidate backed by Elon Musk?

[–] hperrin@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

I mean, kind of. Conservatives don't view Donald Trump and Elon Musk as the wealthy elite that they are. They view them as "political outsiders". So yeah, people want change from the status quo, because the status quo is broken for so many.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] pyre@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

as an outsider I would think no. you don't have much political force to cultivate this sentiment. democrats are already acting shocked and devastated for their buddies. they're on the side of ceos, don't forget. insider trading party can hardly pretend to give a shit about the average person. they will wait for the flame to burn out. return to business as usual: protecting the rich, losing elections and all that.

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

If people can protest for higher taxes on the wealthy, and ensure that money is spent on social services that would be a great start. I don’t know about other countries, but why the fuck can’t America do a Nordic model of socialism?

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 29 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Swede here, first of all, we don't have socialism here, we have a social democratic system here.

Secondly, the words socialism/communism have been tarnished over decades in the US, people have been taught to immediately reject those words regardless of their context.

So if the US can ever get a social democratic system, it needs a rebrand.

It needs something like "The Great America Deal"

load more comments (3 replies)

No one is even trying to assassinate space karen

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 12 points 1 week ago

I don't think we're headed towards that society. This was one incident. We've lived with the billionaire boot on our necks for decades and decades, I think people have become complacent if anything and the vast majority of us go to tictok or places like Lemmy to vent and then never actually do anything about it. We vote, the billionaire class candidate wins, and nothing ever changes. We sigh, vent, and go back to work.

I wouldn't take this one incident to mean anything larger.

[–] Pandantic@midwest.social 9 points 1 week ago

I’m honestly just glad it brought the left and the right together! 🥰Give more CEOs bunnies, get more unity? Working class solidarity, ya’ll. 🥳

[–] AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I hope so. We need more organization though. The biggest hurdle to "us" as the majority is that we suck at working together and looking past differences for the greater good. And they will use every tool like media, social media, TV, film, and more to keep us that way.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 week ago

In my opinion, just like humanity is taking more from nature than is sustainable and in turn we create climate change, modern capitalism takes more from workers than thei can sustain. And just like climate change is not something that happens suddenly, but is more like a slow slide towards doom, the tone in society is steadily getting rougher, until something breaks.

Nah. That won't happen until the Resource Wars begins in earnest.

load more comments
view more: next ›