427
Pillaging by the Super-Rich Will Continue Until the Working Class Revolts
(www.commondreams.org)
this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024
427 points (99.5% liked)
Work Reform
10009 readers
320 users here now
A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.
Our Philosophies:
- All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
- Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
- Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
- We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.
Our Goals
- Higher wages for underpaid workers.
- Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
- Better and fewer working hours.
- Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
- Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.
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
I realize this is gunna make me sound fairly radical and murdery, but it's more legit curiousity...
I sometimes wonder why out of all the people living in misery why someone hasn't gone on to just pick a CEO and... assassinate them? Like they are generally not super well protected. They aren't living like spies with people tasting their food for poison or anything.
People have been losing their patience with Corporate wealth for a long time and talking pitchforks for decades but it's not like these people are untouchable and unknowable. A lot of this stuff is fairly public information. I figure the prerequisites for stochastic terrorism would be pretty ripe but like... Why haven't we heard about even one case? Is it just too personal you think? What is the threshold for domestic terrorist incidents? Why do we see all these lone wolf gunman going after schools and clubs because they have been made so VERY angry... but not tracking down singular people? Is it a different psychological requirement?
I work in the development department of a tiny city that's surrounded by a major city on all sides. It's an enclave for the super-rich, with the average new house here costing over 10 times that of the surrounding area.
There's actually sections in city code regarding the regulation of servant's quarters.
The houses are mostly owned by shell corporations designed to hide the identity of the actual residents. But I know who a lot of them are, and you've definitely heard some of the names, though a lot of the obscenely-rich work hard to start out of the press. There's a billionaire here whose picture I cannot find anywhere online.
Among my many duties, I review the plans for all the houses coming in.
They have sooo much security. You just don't know about it. There's multiple panic rooms, security offices, popup bollards, bulletproof windows, and more.
There are no sidewalks or parks. No sightlines from the street to the house. They build "water features" (moats) and plant vegetative screening to make accessing the house impractical except through the gate - some of which have guardhouses.
They are absolutely terrified of peasants.
I have some guesses...
As long as mainstream media exists, any lone actor will be branded as a terrorist or murderer and will be viewed as this by most people rather than the start of a movement. This makes it very likely to be arrested or killed as well as bring harm and unwanted attention to your loved ones.
The rich people are fairly well protected, by living in exclusive neighborhoods, spending time where threats can't afford to get near, knowing the police are there to protect them.
People are taught to give our right to self defense to the state, that self defense is not ok for "civilized people" except in cases of immediate mortal danger.
Don't kid yourself, the whole point of the state is to facilitate relatively safe theft from classes not in control of it. We are taught to conflate it with "government" and told that it is necessary to prevent utter chaos.
The reason you see right wingers shooting stuff up is I think might have something to do with their lesser ability to reason why such actions are not actually in their favor. That is to say, they are dumber.
I am not sure that's entirely it. Like... Those "exclusive neighbourhoods" basically just means "has fence and security system". If you didn't care about getting caught - basically spree killer style martyrdom- there isn't much to stop you. Most CEOs are notorious creatures of habit and they publicize where they will be fairly regularly. Just hang out by the right golf course and you'll find em.
I think it's just a different mindset. Maybe picking a specific target is more of a cold blooded logic killer thing not a hot blooded spree killer thing and the two require entirely separate buy ins? Or the target type is the difference. Spree killers tend to pick big populations for shock value or because it represents a wider social movement. They also take a bunch of people with them which probably satisfies a feeling of making it "worth it". It is kind of a "fuck that guy in particular" kind of premeditation you would need combined with a conviction to essentially light yourself on fire to burn someone else... And a one to one trade isn't exactly a feel good catharsis.
I don't think it's a matter that a couple of isolated incidents wouldn't cause a panic or not be consequential on a wider scale. I feel like the allure of extreme wealth would lose it's luster pretty fast if suddenly people felt the need to have extreme security details all the time. I don't think it would stop people from dragon hording but it wouldn't take too many incidents before they all would be too afraid to walk to the corner to grab a coffee in person at least for awhile. Generally being rich comes with the idea that it gives you more freedom, not less.
I think it's something on the horizon though. A lot of the language around the extreme wealthy is pretty dehumanizing. Like "He seems like a robot" or "souless narcissistic dirtbag" or "eat the rich" type rhetoric is pretty normalized. I think it's just most people value themselves more highly then taking out a single CEO regardless of the differing scope of individual impacts. We are kind of wired to look at the extreme wealthy as both above and apart in ability to impact the world stage... While simultaneously being kind of non-special people who aren't more or less worthwhile than we ourselves. It might just be that there's still enough hope around that things will change through non-violent means... But I think it is something more about the basic mental math.
I personally just hope we can tax the everliving bajeezus out of them and start some sensible basic quality of life initiatives and electoral reform before it starts getting properly ugly.
“I personally just hope we can tax the everliving bajeezus out of them and start some sensible basic quality of life initiatives and electoral reform before it starts getting properly ugly.”
When corruption is legal and money controls the systems, there’s no shot at getting that reform. We need reform before the reform. I’ve said this before, but it’s only around an average of $100,000 to buy a Supreme Court justice. And Clarence Thomas skews those numbers like crazy. It’s probably closer to $20,000.
Maybe the killer whales are showing us the way.
I think some opfor recon might do you some good.
https://www.businessinsider.com/how-much-silicon-valley-ceos-spend-on-security-and-protection-2019-5?op=1
https://medium.com/mind-talk/the-extremely-crazy-measures-billionaires-take-to-protect-themselves-and-how-much-they-spend-b27f38a4c2aa
https://news.yahoo.com/news/tagged/realestate/news/billionaire-security--ultimate-protection-measures.html
aint no way you will go on any kind of spree in any sort of rich gated community, not alone, the cops will be there at the first hint of a problem for the upper class.
I often wonder why people wronged by these mega corporations just don't buy a cheap drone and fix an explosive to it like you see in Ministry for the Future or in Ukraine's defense against invading Russian soldiers. They don't even need to assassinate these CEOs, they can just blow up their assets to hurt them. Insurance might pay for the damages the first few times but they'll stop covering these assets if it becomes too large a burden for them.
It's been done before... before the "Red Scare" there was the "Black Scare" - it's where the trope of the "bomb-throwing anarchist" comes from.
It's a valid tactic - but if it's not carefully done and well thought through, it can end up creating a lot of blowback... as it did for the anarchist Alexander Berkman when he attempted to assassinate the capitalist Henry Clay Frick (hint - don't assassinate a capitalist during a strike... if the striking workers thought that'd work they'd probably do it themselves).
I'm sure that is some people's plan if they come down with a fatal disease.