Private property. Remove that and many problems will solve themselves real quick, though that will also cause a large number of human deaths before things stabilize
this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2025
44 points (89.3% liked)
Asklemmy
47791 readers
817 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
Those are all things that can make a better society. Why do they need to be given up?
Define better.
Nice try conservative policy maker!
We dont need to give up anything we just need change. Regulations are what keeps capitalism from killing us all and this planet. We have allowed deregulation to put us in this spot and its going to get worst.
I would don the black hood and swing the ax
Tis messy work, but it's gotta be done
Conservatives.
Every last person working to make it a worse world.
Out of the ones you listed, freedom to breed
Provided they don't touch freedom to not breed, and we don't put racist ducks in charge, I think that works be the easiest for me to bear.
But I don't want kids, so it's not much of a sacrifice.
For me that would depend on whether it's just my personal freedom to do so or all of humanity's. I didn't come to the hypothetical thought experiment question thread to not kill 8 billion fucking people.
The landlords.
There are a lot of them so it would be exhausting work to behead them all myself but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make
Billionaires, to the god Quetzalcoatl.
I think we could sacrifice billionaires to Peppa Pig and it'd still get the job done.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Private property isn't a sacrifice. I don't own any.
There's a difference between personal property and private property. Private property is a mall, is a factory, is machinery at your workplace. Personal property is your toothbrush, your Playstation, your Television, your blender, your set of German knives, your computer, your books, etc.
Freedom of speech has never existed. The illusion of it has been allowed to be stronger or weaker in various places at various times, if your speech is no threat it's often allowed, it's when it's a threat that suddenly the freedom vanishes and hides behind excuses like national security or illegal ideologies, etc.
I question how you would get rid of freedom of thought without some sort of hellish brain implants being made mandatory so it's an odd thing to mention.
I'd be willing to sacrifice an awful lot of fascists, reactionaries, and an awful lot of enabling liberals. I'd be willing to sacrifice bourgeoisie. The expropriation of their private property is not a sacrifice but a necessity for things being held in common trust for the people.
Convenience.
Sadly it is something far fewer people are willing to give up than any of the above.
It really depends on the kind of convenience.
Some conveniences are easier to give up, especially if giving them up will benefit others.
Example: if we are willing to walk around with smartphones that are 5mm thicker and 50g heavier, and a bit less slick in design, we can fix them instead of buying new ones. This kind of things. And we are not even willing to give that up.
This guy speaks about this (I'm not sure if this is the right video)
Who is "we"? You got a mouse in your pocket or something? I absolutely would make that sacrifice. I hate smartphones. I didn't own one until 2020 and only ended up with it because some scumbag salesman tricked my aging mom into buying it and adding a new number on her account under contract. So she gave it to me. I wish smartphones would go away. They are as "smart" as AI is "intelligent". I've gone without a car most of my life, i've never had netflix/instagram/amazon/twitter/etc accounts, I didn't have internet for the first 15 years as an adult and I am ready to give these things I have now that I don't want, which are somehow mandatory to participate in life these days. The prospect of getting rid of it all and trying my hand at hermit life or as a hobo grow stronger every day.
I don't know if the general population cares about phone thickness that much, but in my case I actually would hate a too thin phone.
How much better of a world? I'd be happy with half of what I have if it meant literally everyone else in the world could have that much, certainly. Move 4 more people into the house and give up half the money, half the clothes, my car, of course I would do that if it brought the same level of wealth to every single person, it would be not great at first but wow can you imagine how fast it would get better, if nobody was terribly poor? I'd bet that by the time I was old we'd personally be better off than before the split.
Some billionaires
A better world wouldnβt require sacrificing freedoms.
I don't know if you've noticed, but a lot of the trouble in the US was caused by people using their freedom to do terrible things to people, and to set the stage for more of the same.
America is not nearly as free as it claims to be.
No, it isn't.
What does that have to do with my claim?
Weβre talking about a better world and giving up freedoms. Americans have given up a bunch of freedoms and have gotten a worse world because of it.
The one does not flow directly from the other. A better world requires some protecting from each other, which means giving up some freedoms. A system of complete and total freedom would not be good for most people.
However, as Franken said, it is important not to give up essential freedoms. What freedoms, exactly, count as "essential" ones? Hard to say. We should have a thread to discuss it.
Yes, the freedom to murder people would not be good for most people, but you are taking away othersβ freedoms when you do that. But, this thread is about private property, speech, starting a family, and thought. Maybe I should have been more specific in my original comment. A better world wouldnβt require sacrificing these freedoms. It would require giving up the freedom to take othersβ freedoms away.
Any freedom that means you have control over your own body and thoughts, I would consider an βessentialβ freedom, and those are the ones that I mean when I say a better world wouldnβt require giving up those freedoms. If youβre giving up your right to control your own body, youβre inviting a worse world.
On this, I think we can agree.
the ability to lie and "falsely claim".
imagine everybody is stricken with that boy's wish from "liar liar"
sure there would be a bunch of hurt feelings, but maybe the better world can compensate?
The trump family grifters and all their sycophantic (lookin' at you Lindsay Graham) enablers
I'd sacrifice social media algorithms. Delete them all.
Also ban advertisements
load more comments
(2 replies)
It won't be a better world if there's no private property or freedom of speech or freedom to breed or freedom of thought.
The instant these freedoms are forfeited, the world becomes worse.
No private property = better world for everyone (bourgies dont count)
I don't particularly want to be remembered for anything in my life. I don't need fame or standing. I dedicate my life to trying to improve people's lives as a teacher. I'd give my life if it meant everyone would live a significantly better life forever.
A better world would imply that its better even when considering the sacrifice, meaning that any sacrifice would be worth it
load more comments
(1 replies)
Burger King's Chicken fries
It's hard to imagine a world with no freedom of thought being better, somehow.
In practice, I doubt we'll ever have to sacrifice much more than we already have. (Which is actually a significant amount. For example, until recent history living on a schedule was for ascetics and flagellants)
Vanity projects.
If you're not free, the world isn't free.
Private property. I don't actually want to own things for the sake of owning things, I want a stable and reasonably comfortable life. In the current system, the only way to reliably achieve that is to own the things you need in your life. But if the system were such that you could live a decent life without owning a thing, I'll take that.
And that is with the interpretation of private property as literally any possession you can own. If we go by the socialist interpretation of private property as property used to generate capital, I already have no private property and neither do most people here.
Private property for sure, as I don't have any.
Freedom of speech too, as I don't have any.
view more: next βΊ