Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

pebblebrusher t1_je1qkz8 wrote

So just to make sure I’m hearing you right, it’s poor peoples fault for being angry at a system that leaves them in the dust? I agree with you that people would be more likely to make economic sacrifices to benefit others if things were framed that way. But who is framing things that way? It’s the mainstream media pushing narratives, the impoverished don’t have that power. And who owns the mainstream media? The wealthiest among us. We can blame them, not the poor who are often (justifiably) disenfranchised by a system that doesn’t serve them.

Most people just want to feed their families and have a roof over their head, and it really is that simple. These narratives of poor folks being lazy or entitled just aren’t accurate and don’t paint the whole picture.

3

Vic_Hedges t1_je1sgef wrote

My point is that of course they're not accurate, but neither are the "rich people are all lazy and greedy" narratives. People on both sides of the spectrum are demonizing the other side because it makes it easier to hate them.

Be angry all you like, but that's not going to fix anything, unless you're angry enough for a real revolution. And I don't think we're anywhere near that point yet.

0

pebblebrusher t1_je2addy wrote

Agreed that we’re not near a real revolution. But I don’t like the both sides narrative. One side is in a position of power to make change. It’s not an attitude of rich people being lazy or greedy or whatever. I have no issue with rich people in general. I just think it’s absolutely unjustifiable that the wealthiest 1% has more wealth than the bottom 50%, and we have people starving in the land of plenty. And one of those two sides has the power to make that change. And I’m not talking about like, well paid athletes, musicians, lawyers, whatever. I’m explicitly talking about capital owners and the top 1%

2