• LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    144
    ·
    10 months ago

    Because most of us dislike violence, even when it’s necessary and justified.

    Meanwhile, the rich have no problem using violence against us to protect their hoarded wealth or if they can profit from it in the slightest.

  • modifier@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    ·
    10 months ago

    Because the most well-armed portion of the populace has convinced themselves that the lifestyle of the rich is within their reach and identifies more with them than with their actual peers.

    I know we’re having a laugh, but the time when this sort of action is even plausible is quickly running out.

    • rayyy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      10 months ago

      Well that, and the wealthy have seized control of the MSM to propagandize the working class into believing that the rich alone can save them. Since the money holder always, “need a little more”, they gravitate to fascism which promises them “a little more”.

    • TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      By “the most well-armed portion of the populace” I assume you mean law enforcement? It’s an odd way of putting it, but it’s the only interpretation that makes sense because Bubba and his fellow militia members sure as fuck aren’t coming to the defense of the one percent.

  • veni_vedi_veni@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    10 months ago

    because the rich have convinced one segment of the working class that the other segment of the working class sucks

      • Dadd Volante@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        10 months ago

        There are PLENTY of dumb Muricans who make less than 30k a year who think their big break is coming.

        Television and radio have been fueling American “exceptionalism” for so many decades that many DO believe that they will join the ranks of the billionaire class.

        • Acters@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I dont think this but I know if I do get one, I’ll just get a financial advisor to help manage it. Aside from that my life would stay the same as I don’t want family and friends hounding me for cash. I am happy with my situation but would like to get a family of my own sometime and somehow get a place for us to live in. I just want to be financially responsible and be paid a liveable salary amount

  • hOrni@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    10 months ago

    They would taste horribly. Let’s just decapitate them and use as compost. Then they would be of some actual use.

      • 4lan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        10 months ago

        The wealth inequality in America today is worse than France pre-revolution.

        We are long overdue, bring out the guillotines

          • Deuces@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            It should about right, but the French revolution was generally speaking not about income inequality. The women’s march on Versailles is the most economic influenced part of the revolution that I can think of. That was primarily about not having enough food.

            The parts of the revolution that we like to think of as being “the” revolution were mostly about getting basic human rights. The two most important treaties were “the rights of man” which is about… well, the rights of man, and “what is the third estate” which is about the importance of the peasant classes to the nation and their lack of political power in relation to it.

            As for the major events: The storming of the Bastille was about political prisoners (ironically there were none in the Bastille at the time). The tennis court oath was about voting by head rather than by acre. The sans culottes, the girondins, and the mountain were all about giving the people more of a voice. The murder of Louie was a direct response to the flight to varennes, and the terror was just the mountain losing it’s grasp on political control and doing whatever it took to keep it. Even the guillotine itself was designed to give peasant criminals a clean death. Before it was invented nobles would be put to the sword but peasants would be hanged.

            Everything I’ve just said is personal opinion, but my source for all of it is season 3 of Revolutions by Mike Duncan

  • RedditWanderer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    10 months ago

    If there was hope, it must lie in the proles, because only there, in those swarming disregarded masses, eighty-five percent of the population of Oceania, could the force to destroy the Party ever be generated. The Party could not be overthrown from within. Its enemies, if it had any enemies, had no way of coming together or even of identifying one another. Even if the legendary Brotherhood existed, as just possibly it might, it was inconceivable that its members could ever assemble in larger numbers than twos and threes. Rebellion meant a look in the eyes, an inflection of the voice; at the most, an occasional whispered word. But the proles, if only they could somehow become conscious of their own strength, would have no need to conspire. They need only to rise up and shake themselves like a horse shaking off flies. If they chose they could blow the Party to pieces tomorrow morning. Surely sooner or later it must occur to them to do it

  • r3df0x ✡️✝☪️@7.62x54r.ru
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    10 months ago

    Unironically, equating anything left wing with Marxist socialism even though there could be other forms.

    left wing ideas tend to be heavily coupled with progressive social issues that most of the population only agrees with to an extent.

    I think we’re going to see a non socialist populist uprising though with multiple different groups. The elites will no doubt try to claim anyone remotely on the right of it is a raging white supremacist as they’re already doing with populist uprisings.

  • havokdj@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    10 months ago

    Alright look, I hate the 1% too but can we start using new terms besides “eat the rich” and “haha guillotine go BRRRRRR”?

    It gets kinda old when everyone says it.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      10 months ago

      Because the owning class works tirelessly to keep segments of the working class fighting against each other, in America our important arguments are over whether a green m&m is sexy or why does the potato head toy have to have a gender.

      It’s absolutely ridiculous…

    • mcmoor@bookwormstory.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Because the organizer most of the time will themselves be the elite class. And if not them, the next generation will

  • Armok: God of Blood@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    10 months ago

    Because you, dear reader, probably can’t even pull together the motivation to make a sandwich most of the time, let alone take up arms and put yourself in harm’s way.

  • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    10 months ago

    I wouldn’t want to eat beef from a cow treated with steroids or one with mad cow disease or an old cow minutes from death, so why would I want to eat Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, or Warren Buffett?

  • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    10 months ago

    We tried that, but money seems to prefer the company of other money, and is better at organizing than people.