9 ms·

I don't understand why this is being praised. If we all start ignoring property rights and other laws that are govern us, we will be living in anarchy. We reall

I don't understand why this is being praised. If we all start ignoring property rights and other laws that are govern us, we will be living in anarchy. We really have not evolved to some utopia-level, Federation (from star-trek)-like way of behaving with each other. Laws exist for a reason. Seeing the golden arches on the roof is some bizarre statement. The volunteer patiently explaining this is after McDonalds??? WTF? This is not how trademarks work. It was not clear but seems the city is involved in this crap? Does that mean residents can stop paying taxes if they are vegan and the mayor was spotted eating a burger? (replace by some other belief system and repeat) Again, is this being praised? Am I missing something?

drcongo 5y ago
You say that like anarchy is a bad thing.
- NoOneNew 5y ago
  There is an easy argument to this. What happens when someone brings the anarchy to you? Remember, anarchy doesn't care who or what you are. You just are, and you are there for the taking. People dont like anarchy when it's brought onto them. It's all fun and games when you're the anarchist, but it's a two way street.
  - pasabagi 5y ago
    Just on a basic level, the way you're using that word makes no grammatical sense. It works if you're using it as another word for 'chaos', but setting up a food bank is not exactly chaotic behaviour. Seems very sensible, pedestrian sort of stuff to me.
    - NoOneNew 5y ago
      Take a look at the comment I was replying to. It says: "You say that like anarchy is a bad thing." And yes, anarchy is chaos, just intellectualized.
      - pasabagi 5y ago
        >What happens when someone brings the anarchy to you? is not how that word works in english. >And yes, anarchy is chaos, just intellectualized. is not what that word means in english.
      - smoe 5y ago
        Pretty much every anarchist I know proposes highly organized societies, far from chaos. Just organized differently than what people are used to. I wouldn’t necessarily mind, anarchism, or libertarian socialism to use a less loaded term, being brought to my neighborhood. My issues are not with the basic ideas but the concrete implementations.
        NoOneNew 5y ago
        Anarchy, noun, a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority. Do not fucking piss in my pocket and tell me it's raining that anarchists want highly organized structures. You wouldn't mind this you say? Because you imagine you get to do whatever you want. Let's see, in the real world, that applies to everyone. They get to do to you, how they want, without a shred of potential consequence. In a world with various methods of attempting order through consequences enacted by governing bodies, people still do very bad things to other people. No governing body on a wide scale, by your logic, must lead to pure peace and unity. Because it's the fact governments exist that mayhem exists. I already know you have zero time spent in a history book. Any idiot who spends some amount of time reading about any culture, of any time period, notices how it's the implementation of rules and proper consequences is when peace starts to manifest. Along with evenness of implementation. We can obviously argue how severe consequences should be and what rules should exist. That's always a healthy debate to have especially as economies, tech and cultures evolve. For example, certain maritime trading laws need severe, severe, severe updating since the landscape is extremely different these days compared to when they were written literally 150 plus years ago. But to piss and moan that we should just burn it all to the ground because a loser professor tells kids they wont amount to anything because of "the system"... yea, whatever. That and while I do heavily disagree with lots of libertarians, they're about the most extreme minimal amount of government. They're more in favor of zero economic intervention and policy. Practicing libertarians normally have the go that what I do at home is free reign, but there should be a set of rules when it comes to "public interactions". Again though, they want it super minimal. Not non-existent. Dont mix them in with a bunch of teens with weaponized angst. Anarchy is a collective, "sounds like a whole lot of not my problem".
    - Aransentin 5y ago
      For the vast majority of people, "anarchy" does mean "Mad Max style chaos". You probably need to explicitly mention that you mean the specific political ideology if you are speaking to people that aren't really familiar with left-wing thought.
  - atatatat 5y ago
    Move West, OR settle in the hills, OR have bigger guns OR be able to run faster, etc. Humans have dealt with these issues forever.
    - tarboreus 5y ago
      Yes, why would you want law and order when you can just run into the hills?
gtirloni 5y ago
Shockingly, when people don't have food, none of this trademark and property talk matters. Who would have thought.
- jope12 5y ago
  Yeah right, as if anyone in France would have to starve...
  - gtirloni 5y ago
    France is not an utopia. There are around 300k homeless people and it's increased since the pandemic hit.
    - senectus1 5y ago
      wow. that is a large number. no wonder anarchic behaviour like this is rife over there.
  - lm28469 5y ago
    10m people are legally living under poverty threshold in France. Migrants have it especially bad
flohofwoe 5y ago
"In December 2019, the McDonalds was on the verge of shuttering when the emplyees took the keys and occupied it". So that McDonalds would have closed anyway, might as well do something useful with it instead of leaving the property to rot.
- brutus1213 5y ago
  Closing a corporate store != property to rot. https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7b7zq/mcdonalds-food-bank-marseilles-apres-m https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7b7zq/mcdonalds-food-bank-m... The manager doused themselves with petrol and demanded their livelihood and that of 77 other employees be guaranteed. So this is a more complicated situation.
  - flohofwoe 5y ago
    Hmm, so McDonalds headquarters decided to close the location because government funding ran out, but the locals, the employees and even their manager decided for themselves to not accept that decision and instead carry on without McDonalds for the benefit of the community. Sounds like a good decision to me, why take shit from a global company thousands of miles away?
    - zeusk 5y ago
      Because McDonalds is a franchise business and most locations are owned by a local owner. McDonalds provides the branding and frozen food/formulaes for some profit sharing. But hey, feel free to have a french revolution part deux.
      - flohofwoe 5y ago
        Read the Vice article, that says that the local manager himself lead the "revolution" when "McDonalds" decided to close the restaurant. The more details emerge, the less revolting the whole thing sounds. McDonalds closed one of their locations, manager and employees said "fine, then we'll take over for you", the French way.
lm28469 5y ago
Some people are fed up with capitalism and playing (losing) by the rules. > It was not clear but seems the city is involved in this crap? Feeding the poor, especially in times of crisis like covid. Don't you see the appeal ? really ? It's funny to see people feeding the poor, for free, during a crisis, and people like you complaining about things like "this is not how trademarks work", it really gives you a good idea of how some people are viewing the world.
- brutus1213 5y ago
  I saw you got downvoted and upvoted you as I'd like to understand your point of view. McDonalds isn't a faceless corporation. There is some chance it was owned by a franchisor. These people work really hard to put a downpayment on a restaurant. Would you be okay if this was indeed owned by a franchisor who then lost everything they had? This is equivalent to rioters destroying someone's business? Lets say this was a corporate store. Does that make it okay to unlawfully acquire/squat on their property? Are you okay with the spate of shoplifting going on at drugstores in SF? Would you be okay if all corporate stores disappeared tomorrow (or charged you an extra X dollars to deal with loss like this happening ubiquitously)? To your last point, look, I am not some successful business dude. But I benefit from living in a civilized country (my parents took on a lot of hardship to get my to Canada). I also know a story that seems simple is often complex. Are there really no other places in this town where a foodbank could be built? Clearly some powerful people with agendas are making statements.
  - lm28469 5y ago
    The macdonald's filed for bankruptcy in 2019 and was abandoned since then, the ex employees revived it and opened a food bank. The city bought the place and gave it to the people managing the food bank. People on HN react as if these people forcibly entered the place and violently took the control from a successful hard working business owner. I see two options: Either people simply don't understand the situation and side with "hard working business owners" because that's who they identify with. Or they are so disgusted by charity and solidarity (oooo socialism bad) that they prefer a place to be abandoned and useless than serving a greater purpose
sanbor 5y ago
My impression of what is being prised is improving access to food for poor people. Maybe the Mayor thinks this is effective at that end and by paying to McDonald's they can normalize their situation and help improve access to food to poor people. Seems that so far they didn't do a very good job if they have to rely on a nonprofit.
ArkanExplorer 5y ago
France's immigration policies (or, outsourcing them to people smugglers) are the fundamental failure here. Parts of the country now appear indistinguishable from North Africa. As the demographics change, the rule of law and culture that made the country successful will also slip away. The native French people should absolutely be mad about this. These people were brought in to 'solve the aging crisis', but instead are simply contributing to the burden of the welfare state.
jacknews 5y ago
French intellectuals have a long history in this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_is_theft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_is_theft! And honestly, they do have a point, to some extent.
sanbor 5y ago
You could say the kickstart of USA was the illegal action of not paying taxes :)
tablespoon 5y ago
> I don't understand why this is being praised. If we all start ignoring property rights and other laws that are govern us, we will be living in anarchy. It's more complicated than that. You can land in a dystopia by ignoring property rights and you can land in one by respecting them too much. That's especially true with property rights, because people with a lot of property [1] often selfishly see them as the most scared thing ever. [1] or who fantasize about someday having a lot
akagusu 5y ago
Hell YES! It should be praised. And yes, you are missing a lot. Let me tell what you've missed and why you should praise this too. Let's talk about property rights first. Property rights are a joke, and a bad one. When people take a property from a big company, other people start yelling about property rights, but when big companies take a property from someone else, these same people says nothing. Did you know this happens, companies taking people's properties and it's is all legal? Here where I live, a group of families are suing the city because the city wants to take their homes to sell to a big company. The company wants to build a mall, but the owners refused to sell, so the company "asked" for city's help. These families are poor and they are expending money they don't have to defend their homes because a company wants to build a mall no matters what. Nobody questions these kind of thing. People will just say this is how things work because companies just want more profit and there is nothing to do about it. Again, nobody makes any question when companies take something from people, but when people take a company's property to feed starved people we start talking about property rights? Really? Why not talk about people's right to food, shelter, health care, education? Why not talk about companies taking natural resources to make themselves even more rich at expense of people's lives? Why are we accepting this bullshit "companies can do everything they want but people can do nothing" norm? Why do people fighting for a better life is wrong while companies destroying the world for profit is right?

drcongo 5y ago

You say that like anarchy is a bad thing.

NoOneNew 5y ago
There is an easy argument to this. What happens when someone brings the anarchy to you? Remember, anarchy doesn't care who or what you are. You just are, and you are there for the taking. People dont like anarchy when it's brought onto them. It's all fun and games when you're the anarchist, but it's a two way street.
- pasabagi 5y ago
  Just on a basic level, the way you're using that word makes no grammatical sense. It works if you're using it as another word for 'chaos', but setting up a food bank is not exactly chaotic behaviour. Seems very sensible, pedestrian sort of stuff to me.
  - NoOneNew 5y ago
    Take a look at the comment I was replying to. It says: "You say that like anarchy is a bad thing." And yes, anarchy is chaos, just intellectualized.
    - pasabagi 5y ago
      >What happens when someone brings the anarchy to you? is not how that word works in english. >And yes, anarchy is chaos, just intellectualized. is not what that word means in english.
    - smoe 5y ago
      Pretty much every anarchist I know proposes highly organized societies, far from chaos. Just organized differently than what people are used to. I wouldn’t necessarily mind, anarchism, or libertarian socialism to use a less loaded term, being brought to my neighborhood. My issues are not with the basic ideas but the concrete implementations.
      - NoOneNew 5y ago
        Anarchy, noun, a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority. Do not fucking piss in my pocket and tell me it's raining that anarchists want highly organized structures. You wouldn't mind this you say? Because you imagine you get to do whatever you want. Let's see, in the real world, that applies to everyone. They get to do to you, how they want, without a shred of potential consequence. In a world with various methods of attempting order through consequences enacted by governing bodies, people still do very bad things to other people. No governing body on a wide scale, by your logic, must lead to pure peace and unity. Because it's the fact governments exist that mayhem exists. I already know you have zero time spent in a history book. Any idiot who spends some amount of time reading about any culture, of any time period, notices how it's the implementation of rules and proper consequences is when peace starts to manifest. Along with evenness of implementation. We can obviously argue how severe consequences should be and what rules should exist. That's always a healthy debate to have especially as economies, tech and cultures evolve. For example, certain maritime trading laws need severe, severe, severe updating since the landscape is extremely different these days compared to when they were written literally 150 plus years ago. But to piss and moan that we should just burn it all to the ground because a loser professor tells kids they wont amount to anything because of "the system"... yea, whatever. That and while I do heavily disagree with lots of libertarians, they're about the most extreme minimal amount of government. They're more in favor of zero economic intervention and policy. Practicing libertarians normally have the go that what I do at home is free reign, but there should be a set of rules when it comes to "public interactions". Again though, they want it super minimal. Not non-existent. Dont mix them in with a bunch of teens with weaponized angst. Anarchy is a collective, "sounds like a whole lot of not my problem".
  - Aransentin 5y ago
    For the vast majority of people, "anarchy" does mean "Mad Max style chaos". You probably need to explicitly mention that you mean the specific political ideology if you are speaking to people that aren't really familiar with left-wing thought.
- atatatat 5y ago
  Move West, OR settle in the hills, OR have bigger guns OR be able to run faster, etc. Humans have dealt with these issues forever.
  - tarboreus 5y ago
    Yes, why would you want law and order when you can just run into the hills?

gtirloni 5y ago

Shockingly, when people don't have food, none of this trademark and property talk matters. Who would have thought.

jope12 5y ago
Yeah right, as if anyone in France would have to starve...
- gtirloni 5y ago
  France is not an utopia. There are around 300k homeless people and it's increased since the pandemic hit.
  - senectus1 5y ago
    wow. that is a large number. no wonder anarchic behaviour like this is rife over there.
- lm28469 5y ago
  10m people are legally living under poverty threshold in France. Migrants have it especially bad

flohofwoe 5y ago

"In December 2019, the McDonalds was on the verge of shuttering when the emplyees took the keys and occupied it". So that McDonalds would have closed anyway, might as well do something useful with it instead of leaving the property to rot.

brutus1213 5y ago
Closing a corporate store != property to rot. https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7b7zq/mcdonalds-food-bank-marseilles-apres-m https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7b7zq/mcdonalds-food-bank-m... The manager doused themselves with petrol and demanded their livelihood and that of 77 other employees be guaranteed. So this is a more complicated situation.
- flohofwoe 5y ago
  Hmm, so McDonalds headquarters decided to close the location because government funding ran out, but the locals, the employees and even their manager decided for themselves to not accept that decision and instead carry on without McDonalds for the benefit of the community. Sounds like a good decision to me, why take shit from a global company thousands of miles away?
  - zeusk 5y ago
    Because McDonalds is a franchise business and most locations are owned by a local owner. McDonalds provides the branding and frozen food/formulaes for some profit sharing. But hey, feel free to have a french revolution part deux.
    - flohofwoe 5y ago
      Read the Vice article, that says that the local manager himself lead the "revolution" when "McDonalds" decided to close the restaurant. The more details emerge, the less revolting the whole thing sounds. McDonalds closed one of their locations, manager and employees said "fine, then we'll take over for you", the French way.

lm28469 5y ago

Some people are fed up with capitalism and playing (losing) by the rules. > It was not clear but seems the city is involved in this crap? Feeding the poor, especially in times of crisis like covid. Don't you see the appeal ? really ? It's funny to see people feeding the poor, for free, during a crisis, and people like you complaining about things like "this is not how trademarks work", it really gives you a good idea of how some people are viewing the world.

brutus1213 5y ago
I saw you got downvoted and upvoted you as I'd like to understand your point of view. McDonalds isn't a faceless corporation. There is some chance it was owned by a franchisor. These people work really hard to put a downpayment on a restaurant. Would you be okay if this was indeed owned by a franchisor who then lost everything they had? This is equivalent to rioters destroying someone's business? Lets say this was a corporate store. Does that make it okay to unlawfully acquire/squat on their property? Are you okay with the spate of shoplifting going on at drugstores in SF? Would you be okay if all corporate stores disappeared tomorrow (or charged you an extra X dollars to deal with loss like this happening ubiquitously)? To your last point, look, I am not some successful business dude. But I benefit from living in a civilized country (my parents took on a lot of hardship to get my to Canada). I also know a story that seems simple is often complex. Are there really no other places in this town where a foodbank could be built? Clearly some powerful people with agendas are making statements.
- lm28469 5y ago
  The macdonald's filed for bankruptcy in 2019 and was abandoned since then, the ex employees revived it and opened a food bank. The city bought the place and gave it to the people managing the food bank. People on HN react as if these people forcibly entered the place and violently took the control from a successful hard working business owner. I see two options: Either people simply don't understand the situation and side with "hard working business owners" because that's who they identify with. Or they are so disgusted by charity and solidarity (oooo socialism bad) that they prefer a place to be abandoned and useless than serving a greater purpose

sanbor 5y ago

My impression of what is being prised is improving access to food for poor people. Maybe the Mayor thinks this is effective at that end and by paying to McDonald's they can normalize their situation and help improve access to food to poor people. Seems that so far they didn't do a very good job if they have to rely on a nonprofit.

ArkanExplorer 5y ago

France's immigration policies (or, outsourcing them to people smugglers) are the fundamental failure here. Parts of the country now appear indistinguishable from North Africa. As the demographics change, the rule of law and culture that made the country successful will also slip away. The native French people should absolutely be mad about this. These people were brought in to 'solve the aging crisis', but instead are simply contributing to the burden of the welfare state.

jacknews 5y ago

French intellectuals have a long history in this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_is_theft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_is_theft! And honestly, they do have a point, to some extent.

sanbor 5y ago

You could say the kickstart of USA was the illegal action of not paying taxes :)

tablespoon 5y ago

> I don't understand why this is being praised. If we all start ignoring property rights and other laws that are govern us, we will be living in anarchy. It's more complicated than that. You can land in a dystopia by ignoring property rights and you can land in one by respecting them too much. That's especially true with property rights, because people with a lot of property [1] often selfishly see them as the most scared thing ever. [1] or who fantasize about someday having a lot

akagusu 5y ago

Hell YES! It should be praised. And yes, you are missing a lot. Let me tell what you've missed and why you should praise this too. Let's talk about property rights first. Property rights are a joke, and a bad one. When people take a property from a big company, other people start yelling about property rights, but when big companies take a property from someone else, these same people says nothing. Did you know this happens, companies taking people's properties and it's is all legal? Here where I live, a group of families are suing the city because the city wants to take their homes to sell to a big company. The company wants to build a mall, but the owners refused to sell, so the company "asked" for city's help. These families are poor and they are expending money they don't have to defend their homes because a company wants to build a mall no matters what. Nobody questions these kind of thing. People will just say this is how things work because companies just want more profit and there is nothing to do about it. Again, nobody makes any question when companies take something from people, but when people take a company's property to feed starved people we start talking about property rights? Really? Why not talk about people's right to food, shelter, health care, education? Why not talk about companies taking natural resources to make themselves even more rich at expense of people's lives? Why are we accepting this bullshit "companies can do everything they want but people can do nothing" norm? Why do people fighting for a better life is wrong while companies destroying the world for profit is right?