this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2024
1275 points (93.9% liked)
Microblog Memes
6036 readers
3640 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The argument that the employment contract is not a consensual transaction is a weak argument against capitalism. The employment contract is voluntary by any normal juridical standard. Even if this difficulty could be overcome, it would only necessarily imply a UBI not abolishing capitalist property relations. A much stronger argument is the inalienable rights argument based on the factual inalienability of responsibility
Might be logically weaker, but it might resonate with more people. I personally haven't understood your last sentence. It is more valuable for people to grasp the idea you are conveying then be 100% precise.
That argument doesn't work. It is harmful to the cause to make arguments that initially resonate but fall apart if you think about them.
Did you read my other comments in this thread? Still working on how to best present this idea. Feedback is helpful. The idea is that consent is not sufficient to transfer responsibility. No amount of consent can make someone else solely responsible for the workers' actions (labor). An argument on that basis can show why a voluntary contract is wrong