this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2025
141 points (98.0% liked)
Chapotraphouse
14325 readers
650 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Why can’t we build on history, science, and philosophy as a species?
We all know there’s enough resources for everyone. No one should have to go hungry, unsheltered, or without medical care.
However, we as a species are pretty, panicky, and cruel. I believe we have the science, technology, math, and philosophy to identify, understand, and know how to solve for all of these types of problems.
We just can’t overcome human nature as there’s a system in place that beckons to the worst in us.
We could save ourselves if it weren’t for us…
Editing only at the end of my post. I’m not responding to each, but y’all took this somewhere not within my intent of shared thought. It’s ok, you do you if it makes you happy.
I’ve no idea who I’ve been purported to be paraphrasing, or how I’m telling on myself. I’ll accept I have ignorances, biases, and blind spots. It’s quite likely you all do too.
Homelessness for example doesn’t need to exist. Take the US for example, there’s 20-30 empty homes per homeless person.
There’s ways to solve these problems without turning into hippy communes or whatever derogatory view of societal approach used to help those that have it harder. (Likely a result of their own poor choices)
Some people are weak (physically or mentally) and won’t be of much value to society. Should we not be in a timeline where we just send them off into the woods to die as to not deal with the burden?
Some people are drawn to lead, others not. To a degree we’re all a bit lazy, or we’ve found a way to lean into one trait that allows compensation for another.
We are all the minimally acceptable versions of ourselves. Otherwise, you’d change.
Tl;dr; life doesn’t have to be the way it is and it could/should be better, but it isn’t.
Human nature is collaborative, not competitive. We never would have succeeded as a species otherwise. This is capitalist realism, the idea that capitalism is simply the natural order of things.
It seems reasonable to assume that whatever aspect of human behavior might be born of "nature" rather than environment would be collaborative. Otherwise no society would have gotten off the ground. "Human nature" in this case is just shorthand for that idea.
I certainly wouldn't call any "human nature" immutable, since we've seen that environmental effects can make people do almost anything. My statement in the previous comment would have made no sense if I was referring to "human nature" as immutable, since we've all agreed that the environment of capitalist society causes humans to behave in competitive ways even when they lead to negative outcomes.
Yeah, I see what you mean, actually. I wasn't saying "human nature" was immutable, but the person I was replying to was. And you make a good point that I should have attacked that explicitly in my reply, actually. I'll keep that in mind of next time I run into this (depressingly common) "humans are naturally bad" argument.
You would be correct to do so because Marx himself emphasized that point multiple times
shut the fuck up liberal. your idea of human nature is 100% wrong, humans are the most dominant species on earth exactly because we are biologically hardwired toward cooperation. you're just telling on yourself
paraphrasing fucking aaron sorkin and acting like you aren't a total dipshit, jesus christ
gee I wonder if we are shaped by MATERIAL CONDITIONS or just innately profit-driven shitheads? what a mystery! retire this flaccid excuse please
What human nature? Humans evolve and change just like every other animal.
To that end, everyone basic needs should — MUST be met. There’s always something more that could be acquired or worked for, but why is it so hard for us to make a society where the bottom rungs on Maslow’s hierarchy can be given to all humans.
Seriously though. Idk why people can’t work this shit out.
Yeah.
Which means what?
The current world order and the "human nature" it implies must be maintained by force. People can work things out, but a certain group (billionaires, elites, burgers) profits greatly from never letting us have the chance.
This awareness is class consciousness.
Yes. But let’s not underestimate the citizen support for capitalism.
It really still depends on class. You have to be pretty high up the pyramid scheme these days for capitalism to benefit you. A great many people are at least skeptical if it.
Every time someone tries, a B-52 appears overhead and becomes the thing they gotta deal with
But sometimes there's an anti-aircraft missile waiting for that bomber.
Or just do things Vietcong style and dig some hidey holes to shoot invaders from 😉
?
Autocorrect of 'missile'?
Yep, fat finger problems
I know you're not doing it but what's up with others attacking communists cuz "human nature means it's impossible" but they haven't done shit to you???
Sometimes I feel like
::: rant It's just reflecting and they know they're bad people or something and instead of acknowledging it they dive into cognitive dissonance to make it common so they can say they're 'better than most' :::
Another day, another banger from dbzerzero
Putting aside the fact that human nature is a BS concept invented to pacify people into not overthrowing their society (the other comments have already hammered this in enough), it appears to me that you even recognize this on some level.
Clearly this system is at least having an affect on how "human nature" is expressed. It's not much of a leap to conclude that this system affects what is even considered "human nature".