Hacker News Reader

Comment by tdsamardzhiev | Hacker News Reader

Not if the alternative to working for Amazon is, well, death by starvation. People say communism falls apart once subjects stop having reasonably similar goals. Market economy is certainly more resistant to this, but is it infinitely more resistant? How far can we push inequality before that becomes an issue?

Edit: That was meant as a response to the parent comment.

View on HN

A radical thought: If i have the alternative to work for an dystopian megacorp or starve to death... why then not choose the third option: Go to jail while causing as much damage as possible?

(Disclaimer: Only a philosophical thought)

Well you don't need a Joker-style nihilistic attitude to cause as much damage as possible to everyone without distinction. This can also be achieved in a meaningful way following the workers tradition of sabotage and direct action.

Hurt or destroy those people/structures making our lives hell. That makes sense. Just don't drag random people into it.

Yeah, this is what i have thought... in german there is the saying "Mach kaputt was euch kaputt macht" (more or less "destroy what destroys you").

I like it even though i don't speak german. Thanks for sharing!

Your third option is likely to only reinforce the sociopolitical conditions that lead to corporatism and starvation in the first place.

I have thought about this: We know that pressure produces counterpressure, the more you knock down a populous the more likely they are to rise up and burn everything down regardless the consequeces (see the various slave revolts in history)... it might not IMPROVE the situation directly, but with every burning down of a society there is a new chance that what rises out of the ruins may be better.

Hegelian dialectics

Because your actions will then give mega corps and the governments they control a reason to reduce your freedom even more.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com