• JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 days ago

      Of course. However killing billionaires is still immoral if there are peaceful solutions to redistributing the wealth, and useless if the act of killing them doesn’t magically redistribute the wealth fairly (it doesn’t)

        • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 days ago

          What do you think I really mean? Killing anyone, including billionaires, is unethical. Maybe it could be justified in a utilitarian sense if it was guaranteed to lead to wealth redistribution and there was no other way, but even that isn’t the case.

          • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 days ago

            Do you understand why people use of the phrase “eat the rich” or their threats to bring out guillotines? Do you understand the historic relevance and the iconography. To me, if you did, there would be no reason to make the misguided statement, “that’s immoral.” Other than to create subterfuge.

      • gravityowl@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        if there are peaceful solutions to redistributing the wealth

        But that’s the whole point, there aren’t any.

        The whole idea of being able to tax them fairly and properly is merely a pacifier so the people think they have a chance. And while they hope something might change, the rich actually use their power, money and influence to rig the system in a way that ensure they’ll never have to pay their fair share.

        There’s no peaceful solution to the unethical and violent accumulation of wealth