On va remettre quelques points au clair, parce que visiblement tout le monde résume la Ferme au film de 54. Car oui, le bouquin *commence* par une critique du capitalisme, et se termine par l'incapacité des animaux de faire la différence entre les capitalistes) et les staliniens.
Honestly the most offensive part of this take on Animal Farm is that it turns a socialist’s warning of how socialist impulses can be subverted by authoritarians into a critique of capitalism. It guts the entirety of the book’s message
@kvno1337@DankHumanBeing@smellyglu ... need to be legaly owner of the extraction site. Even the "souvenir rocks" you'll found near any mountains are technically illegal harvesting ... Legality need infrastructures ... infrastructures need maintenance ...
@kvno1337@DankHumanBeing@smellyglu 1° Virtualy no employee own what he produce. The only exceptions are either *some* artists, or are legaly thieves.
2° You'd be surprise to the actual "ownership" system we had accross the ages.
3° If it was false, then no GOS would go outside of any company.
4° To do so, you ...
@DankHumanBeing@kvno1337@smellyglu "Not being given something fo free is not coercion"
Says the one complaining he has to pay taxes for the entire infrastructure he benefit from.
Once again : just go somewhere else if you don't want to pay taxes.
@kvno1337@DankHumanBeing@smellyglu In one case, you have to depend on the owner agreeing to buy your workforce, because he own the capital. You get less than you work for.
In the other, there is no ownership, so what you get is what you've worked for.
Only one need a state to be enforced, and thus taxes.
@DankHumanBeing@kvno1337@smellyglu No one is.
You aren't forced to be where you are and to stay there. It's your choice.
Like no one is forced to have to pay for food, shelter, etc.
@kvno1337@DankHumanBeing@smellyglu I think you may not have seen a lot of "nature" recently.
There is shelter, or at least ressource to make them.
There is plenty of food around, or ways to produce it.
But, due to the concept of *propriety*, you can't do so.
The same propriety you ask to be respected.
@kvno1337@DankHumanBeing@smellyglu And so what ? Will the US fund expeditionnary forces to get there taxes if you go in antartica ?
"Nature isn't coercitive", you said. No one is forcing you to stay where you are.
@DankHumanBeing@kvno1337@smellyglu Love the fact you are asking for not having to pay anything ... (I hope you still pay your employees and not complain about it)
Go ahead. Take things in your supermarket as you need, and try to not pay.
@kvno1337@DankHumanBeing@smellyglu BTW, there is countries without taxes, legal loophole to not pay, and regions unreachable by fiscal services (rainforest, oceans, deserts, ...).
So, either "Work or starve" is coercion, or "Pay or get punished" isn't one.
Wanting to have it both way would be hypocrisy.
@kvno1337@DankHumanBeing@smellyglu I am not running away. It *is* the point.
When you do not work, you are punished by being deprived of access to food and shelter, depite the fact there is plenty of unused both.
As for taxes, the same system that assure you people are forced to work, forces you to pay.
@DankHumanBeing@kvno1337@smellyglu Oh, really ?
What do you think happen to those who don't have a job ?
SImilarly, you can alway go to some places where you don't pay taxes. Nobody forces you to stay in a fiscal hell.
@absolutedegen34@smellyglu If you want to go to the effort, ok.
Let's use Howard Scott works :
How much joules did the worker produced, for how much pay. Same question with the owner. And what does the difference between the ratio tell us ?
@DankHumanBeing@smellyglu "I'm not robbed ! I gave the thuggs half my income on my free will, and not at all because they would burn my house if I didn't comply !"