You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
27 points

That’s not really true.

Right now under the capitalist systems there are countless jobs that are detrimental to the world we live in, or don’t actually produce anything of tangible value.

We would be a lot better off if a lot of people just didn’t do their “jobs”.

We don’t need a hundred types of sugar water, Or McDonald’s plastic toys. Landlords, bankers, stock brokers, financial planners, most lawyers are all useless.

Overpopulation is also a Malthusian myth. It isn’t that we have too many people. Under capitalism resources are not distributed well. It doesn’t make sense that most of us are working in a system that expects infinite growth with the finite resources our world is limited to. All in order to make a handful of people increasingly wealthy while the rest of us increasingly can’t afford to live a basic, simple life.

We can and must work toward building a new system (spoiler: it’s called Anarchism) while dismantling the old, inefficient, destructive system we are currently forced to try to survive in.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I wouldn’t dismiss the concerns of overpopulation entirely. Simple math tells us that, unless we are able to create a society with infinite resources (i.e. post-scarcity), it will always be necessary to make sure our rate of consumption is less than the rate of replacement.

So far, we are losing that battle, given the significant amount of non-renewable resources we consume at a global scale. On top of that, unchecked development which is needed to ensure that the needs of massively overpopulated regions are met endangers what few natural/renewable resources remain, which carries the threat of food scarcity, loss of drinking water, and permanent environmental damage on ecosystems that we depend on.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Which part of what I said is not true? My point was most people are fucking lazy and will do everything they can to leave shit to be done by others. I’m always the one at my job cleaning up after other people’s fuckups and the one people go to for answers because I actually made the effort to learn everything. Under capitalism this is noticed by my superiors and I’m top of the list any time a promotion becomes available and I have an in if I’m trying to get hired at a different company and people I know have went there resulting in more pay for me than my coworkers who don’t make an effort in their work. Under a system where everyone is just given what they need I would be getting the exact same life as people who are doing far less than me.

Also how can you say overpopulation is a myth and simultaneously say there are finite resources in our world? Finite means we will run out.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

My thoughts about this

Anarcho-communism (and similar ideologies) isn’t really about everyone being equal, that’s a silly goal that would take enforcement and calculations, it’s not practical. Instead, anarcho-communism is a different way of living based on cooperation rather than exploitation and doing what is needed for people rather than what a few rich owners want.

You and a “lazy” person won’t necessarily have the same outcome. A person unwilling to even pick up after themselves or contribute would still be guaranteed housing, food, and health care, but that’s about it. You on the other hand could work to have a nicer place or acquire things, so long as you aren’t getting them exploiting others or common resources. If you build a nice chair the anarcho-fuzz isn’t gonna come and take it to split it amongst the community.


The thinking around “laziness” needs to change. A person unwilling to do even the absolute minimum might be called lazy, but A person unwilling to trade their time for money isn’t a bad thing. It’s not the “lazy” people that wipe out species, start wars, and cause climate change.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Let’s also not forget that a lot of those “lazy” people are actually struggling with illness, insecurity, lack of critical resources, discrimination, burnout from “the grind”, or just plain don’t see the point in contributing much to a system that never seems to contribute anything back. Guaranteed housing, food, and healthcare would fix a lot of the problems that cause “laziness”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

A person unwilling to even pick up after themselves or contribute would still be guaranteed housing, food, and health care, but that’s about it.

And who is having to work extra to pick up their slack? That housing, food, and healthcare all require labor from others.

permalink
report
parent
reply