this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2025
300 points (97.5% liked)

shitposting

1787 readers
472 users here now

Rules •1. No Doxxing •2. No TikTok reposts •3. No Harassing •4. Post Gore at your own discretion, Depends if its funny or just gore to be an edgelord.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 week ago

On the surface this sounds like a terrible and extreme mindset, so I thought about how one might go about disproving it.

Clearly if everyone owned enough productive land to be self-sufficient it would be false. We are told this is still theoretically possible, but it's a finite resource so it's not a given.

Conversely, if one person owned all the land with the arbitrary power of taxing or restricting its use... that would make it true. Similarly with two, three, a dozen...

So contrary to my bias, it would seem a safer bet to consider it true (absent better info or theory)... and its truth may simply be a matter of degrees. I wonder where the logical (almost mathematical or numeric) tipping point is, and how the problem could more precisely be defined or measured.