I wonder what would happen. Let’s say 10,000 people.
Let’s say some extremist, highly organized group manages to successfully assassinate the 10,000 richest people in the world, and then disappears without a trace.
I’m guessing those people would all be succeeded by their next of kin. Would that cause a wave of change or…?
Let’s say some extremist, highly organized group manages to successfully assassinate the 10,000 richest people in the world, and then disappears without a trace.
The problem is that these billionaires profit the most from a system of resource exploitation, but they do not benefit exclusively. We’d still have hundreds of billions of dollars in fossil fuel centric infrastructure that we’d need to replace and reconfigure. And that reconfiguration would require a national organized effort.
Ultimate, you can’t just wave a wand and make Rich People Go Away. You need a national project that is both popular and efficient. One that reduces emissions while improving quality of life. You need a Green New Deal.
That’s not something you can affect purely from subtraction.
You’d have to also threaten to assassinate their inheritors from taking the estate, or just take the estate. Either way that’s violence. The question then becomes is it okay to use the Master’s tools to build your own house, to which my answer is no I can’t. I can use the Master’s tools to tear down their own houses. I may be a bit too idealistic though.
You’re correct. It would cause some disruption and a lot of joy, but system would continue. It need to be overthrown entirely and new one built. That is, proletarian revolution is needed.
my boy/girl.
This is so stupid it makes me worried for the human race that people actually fall for that. Do people honestly think that the problem of emissions goes away by taking out the people owning the companies producing the emissions? Isn’t it extremely obvious that the same companies will produce the same emissions regardless of who owns them as long as the demand for their goods, services and laws governing them stays the same?
I mean sure, lets blame the owner of exxon for the emissions caused by cars and powerplants. I’m sure people will enjoy riding to work on a horse amish style if it means limiting global warming to 2 degrees instead of three, how about you pitch that idea to a large group of people an see how that goes.
You know what would actually help? Electing the right people. Not just caring about this on election day when you have the choice between two shades of shit, get the right people primaried. But you know whats the truth? The truth is that it’s not the billionaires fault. The truth is the majority of people don’t care about saving the planet, not if it inconviniences them and thats why democracy doesn’t nip this in the bud. Because it works. It actually represents the people and their will and the people who care are represented by the guys that loose by 30% in the primaries, as in getting 3% instead of 35%.
You take out the billionaires and the industries will be run by the workers, the state or whatever anarcho socialist conglomerate you can think up, but nothing will change. Because 90% of people are too busy with their own little lives to care about 3 degrees global warming and nothing will change that.
Billionaires brought the tram and dismantled it for car infrastructure
that’s a scarily large amount of billionaires
Another consequence of inflation, I suppose.
That’s 2700 more than what I would like
I’ve seen this meme a while ago and I saw someone saying he wants to run over the billionaires back and forth to make sure they’re dead and I deeply agree with that.
A little billionaire cocktail math for you. Each billionaire emits in the neighbourhood of 1 million times more CO2 than the average person. So you streetcar just 3000 or so billionaires and that’s the equivalent of reducing the earth’s population by about 3 billion. Can’t really think of anything greener
The emissions from their investments … thats the same as the emissions of your place of work or the emissions of the company you buy your stuff from. Lets blame that on an extremely small group of people instead of the billions of people who consume the products enabling them.
Not that I don’t believe you but I’d love to cite this in future discussions, where did you get your stats from?
Thats their investments, not their personal use. According to your source anyway.
Put a sniper on top of the cart in case the switchman gets bought out. Ain’t taking no chances.
And when the sniper gets paid off?
Now there’s 2702 billionaires to take out…
So killing them saves 1.00074 habitable biospheres?
Add on the left workers rights, freedom, and real economic prosperity
B…but the shareholders! Won’t someone please think of the shareholders. 😢
I see no problem in this trolley problem… ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
2700? That’s more than I thought.
Lest we forget, trolley tracks are electrified sogo ahead and let ol jg gotrox step on one
Trolley problems usually have some conflict that makes the decision hard.
Exactly. There’s no moral dillema here. I’m keeping the switch in the “left” position and welding it in place, just in case.
