this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2026
816 points (98.9% liked)
Enough Musk Spam
3370 readers
2 users here now
For those that have had enough of the Elon Musk worship online.
No flaming, baiting, etc. This community is intended for those opposed to the influx of Elon Musk-related advertising online. Coming here to defend Musk or his companies will not get you banned, but it likely will result in downvotes. Please use the reporting feature if you see a rule violation.
Opinions from all sides of the political spectrum are welcome here. However, we kindly ask that off-topic political discussion be kept to a minimum, so as to focus on the goal of this sub. This community is minimally moderated, so discussion and the power of upvotes/downvotes are allowed, provided lemmy.world rules are not broken.
Post links to instances of obvious Elon Musk fanboy brigading in default subreddits, lemmy/kbin communities/instances, astroturfing from Tesla/SpaceX/etc., or any articles critical of Musk, his ideas, unrealistic promises and timelines, or the working conditions at his companies.
Tesla-specific discussion can be posted here as well as our sister community /c/RealTesla.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The whole point of the phrase is: When the poor have nothing left to eat, they will eat the rich.
It wasnt coined as a threat. It's a warning. The poor are already starving, and there is a limit.
And the thing is that 'rich' is not an intrinsic property, it's not genetic. When you eat the rich, everything they were hoarding - that which gave them the title 'rich' - becomes accessible. It doesn't disappear from the system like an MMO inventory.
Only after the starving poor eat the rich, will there be a path to a possible future without starvation.
~ Pearl S. Buck, The Good Earth
People have been theorizing (or fantasizing, rather) about the supposed collapse of the system since 1850, thinking it was soon then.
Guess it's soon enough for us to not see it in this lifetime either.
Aka, worthless.
It's collapsed a bunch of times.
The sudden, often arbitrary, and devastating failures make up much of the case for why the system is bad.
Is the system bad? Sure.
Will a good system finally show up? Doubt.
Those collapses you mentioned haven't lead to a worthwhile system, have they?
Collapse is meaningless on its own.
People try new things. Sometimes those things work.
The problem isn't that ideas are floated and failed. It's that systems calcify around people in privileged positions.
Economic models in 2026 are far more advanced and improved than ones from 1626
That tendency of systems is precisely why I'm skeptical of any real systemic change to occur.
Advanced and improved are vague terms. 1) Are the systems today better for the common man? And if so, how? 2) If it takes 400 years, then it's largely irrelevant to anyone concerned with systemic change within their own lifetime.
Systems endure until they don't. A system with a long history tends to have a more entrenched position and a wider base of supporters.
If you want a full categorical break down of 400 years of economic plans and conglomerated practices, I might point you to your local university and advise you to pick up any number of lectures on the subject.
But if you're just going to "Nuh-uh" everything since the Dutch East India Company incorporated...
Or rather, until they give way to another system that exploits the masses for the elite. In reality, systemic change in the sense of mass exploitation ending has never occured in history. It was there through the 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th, and even today in the 21st century.
The form it takes changing is irrelevant since the exploitation of masses itself never stopped.
It doesn't matter if the name it's given or how it happens changes.
What a roundabout non-answer.
Asking you to specify how the systems have improved specifically w.r.t. the common man (which I don't believe they have) doesn't require university lectures if you had a concrete answer.
I'm not "nuh-uh"-ing everything, I'm looking for reason for common beliefs people hold that, as far as I've seen so far, have been nothing but just vibes and values. In reality, those claims (eg: "systemic change is real and has happened!") have been historically inaccurate and anachronistic, if not simply straight-up false.
That requires a very slanted and cynical view of history. "Don't trust anyone, they're all just trying to oppress you. You should be trying to oppress them instead." is the sort of toxic machismo that gets you Hegseth and Rubio butchering people the globe over while liberals shrug in apathy.
Sure, that's the propaganda you get from fascist media. Ultra-nationalism is rooted in the belief that we're in a perpetual race war and the only open question is whether your race is ascendent. Internationalism is fake. Egalitarian political movements are (((controlled))) from the shadows. Intersectionality is impossible. Only brutal totalitarian hierarchy has ever existed - can ever exist - so you might as well submit to the boot on your neck with the promise that you'll have the opportunity to stomp someone else's neck down the road.
You've pickled your brain on fascist ideology so badly that you've lost the ability to read anything you disagree with.
This isn't an argument. If you think systemic change in the sense of mass exploitation ending has indeed occurred, give me examples.
More of the same. Labelling it propaganda isn't an argument. Again, if systems have actually improved, demonstrate how. If you can't, all of this is just elaborate mumbo-jumbo.
Ultranationalism would exist even without such a belief. I don't believe egalitarian political movements have done much, not that they're "controlled from the shadows"; the world is regressing. The US and EU are actively becoming more fascist. Authoritarian hierarchies are pretty much all that have existed in the histories of countries. The only places they didn't are in places like aboriginal tribes and primitive set ups such as those, unfortunately.
If it has existed at the country level, then let me know. If it hasn't existed, then I'm not going to believe in an abstraction of "potential"— I believe in whats been empirically confirmed and only what has been empirically confirmed.
Ad hominem.
I read your answer, it wasn't an argument or a response, just rambling.
It is. You just don't like reading it.
So you're plugging your ears and spitting out logical fallacies without understanding them in the slightest.
You clearly didn't read anything I said.
And no, actually, you were attacking me instead of my argument. Thus, ad hominem.
I don't suddenly "miscomprehend" logical fallacies just because you claim so.
I haven't seen any evidence to support this claim
Ever since 1850? Geee, just two years after the Revolutions of 1848, I guess the peoples should never be appeased because they'll just want more and more!
I wasn't talking about the US 🤦
It's stupid how people just assume it's america if you don't specify.
What the fuck are you talking about? Spring of Nations didn't spread to the US in the slightest.
Then what are you talking about?
As for me, I'm referring to Marx and communist critiques of capitalism that have spanned several European countries in its inception which were then expanded by 20th century and modern communists who repeatedly said that collapse was imminent and inevitable.
That's been a consistent theme that hasn't changed since around 1850.
People keep going "oh yeah, it's really gonna collapse this time! There's gonna be real good change soon!" Nope. Bs. Historically inaccurate.
I'm running out of names for that advent, so here's the last one, I'm sorry but you're just too semantically demanding. So here goes - Springtime of the Peoples
As for the rest. Are you seriously claiming that there were no uprisings or revolutions since 1850? Brother, I'm sure you can do some better research.
Or are you looking for something more spectacular, the full-blown worldwide revolution, and anything smaller than that is just too futile for your taste.
Google Russia 1918 and keep reading.
If Elon dies, lots of his wealth will disappear as the stock price of his companies will drop. Not sure how much and if they will recover but, like it or not, he is a big part of the reason the stock market loves his companies.