5 ms·

So when was this? When European businesses were exploiting the “new world”? When plantation owners were employing slaves? When robber barons were exploiting peo

So when was this? When European businesses were exploiting the “new world”? When plantation owners were employing slaves? When robber barons were exploiting people and polluting the environment? The “greed is good” 80s? VCs throwing money at startups that they know will never be profitable waiting for the “greater fool”?

boondoggle16 3y ago
Before globalization, even before the industrial revolution. The agriculture revolution has been a disaster for the human race. Or at least the individuals within it.
- scarface74 3y ago
  You mean when there was mass starvation, low life expectancy and mostly on the backs of people colonized by Europeans?
  - boondoggle16 3y ago
    No, that was after globalization, not before. Exploiting the backs of other workers is at the core of globalism, and the core of evil (imo). Yes, there was starvation, but if we're all starving, who cares, really? Better we all starve than to have a despot in power starving me while he eats fat. Eat his fat instead.
lesuorac 3y ago
I mean didn't the greater European community as a whole benefit greatly by access to the materials found in the "new world" (and also Asia)? Plantations is a bit vague but to assume Cotton; people benefited tremendously from cheaper clothes. A lot of the early industrial revolution was weaving machines which wouldn't be possible without a lot of cotton. Robber barons is a bit vague but to assume railroads; people benefited tremendously from trade. Our cities are built with a lot of materials that aren't locally sourced. --- Things have trade-offs but to say there were nothing positive about something that has negatives is very dishonest.
- scarface74 3y ago
  > mean didn't the greater European community as a whole benefit greatly by access to the materials found in the "new world" (and also Asia)? At the expense of killing millions? < Plantations is a bit vague but to assume Cotton; people benefited tremendously from cheaper clothes. A lot of the early industrial revolution was weaving machines which wouldn't be possible without a lot of cotton. At the expense of killing and enslaving millions?
  - lesuorac 3y ago
    It would really help if you could identify a specific business to talk about. Columbus wasn't a business but if you take a look at why he got funding [1] you'll see its very clearly for the greater good (of the crown). Of course, the inhabitants of the land being colonized are not taken into consideration but they're also not the one giving Columbus his funding. I think you need to think a bit longer about this. If slavery wasn't useful economically why did so many civilizations engage in it? [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyages_of_Christopher_Columbus#Funding_campaign https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyages_of_Christopher_Columbu...
    - scarface74 3y ago
      It didn’t help the slaves or the people being colonized…

boondoggle16 3y ago

Before globalization, even before the industrial revolution. The agriculture revolution has been a disaster for the human race. Or at least the individuals within it.

scarface74 3y ago
You mean when there was mass starvation, low life expectancy and mostly on the backs of people colonized by Europeans?
- boondoggle16 3y ago
  No, that was after globalization, not before. Exploiting the backs of other workers is at the core of globalism, and the core of evil (imo). Yes, there was starvation, but if we're all starving, who cares, really? Better we all starve than to have a despot in power starving me while he eats fat. Eat his fat instead.

lesuorac 3y ago

I mean didn't the greater European community as a whole benefit greatly by access to the materials found in the "new world" (and also Asia)? Plantations is a bit vague but to assume Cotton; people benefited tremendously from cheaper clothes. A lot of the early industrial revolution was weaving machines which wouldn't be possible without a lot of cotton. Robber barons is a bit vague but to assume railroads; people benefited tremendously from trade. Our cities are built with a lot of materials that aren't locally sourced. --- Things have trade-offs but to say there were nothing positive about something that has negatives is very dishonest.

scarface74 3y ago
> mean didn't the greater European community as a whole benefit greatly by access to the materials found in the "new world" (and also Asia)? At the expense of killing millions? < Plantations is a bit vague but to assume Cotton; people benefited tremendously from cheaper clothes. A lot of the early industrial revolution was weaving machines which wouldn't be possible without a lot of cotton. At the expense of killing and enslaving millions?
- lesuorac 3y ago
  It would really help if you could identify a specific business to talk about. Columbus wasn't a business but if you take a look at why he got funding [1] you'll see its very clearly for the greater good (of the crown). Of course, the inhabitants of the land being colonized are not taken into consideration but they're also not the one giving Columbus his funding. I think you need to think a bit longer about this. If slavery wasn't useful economically why did so many civilizations engage in it? [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyages_of_Christopher_Columbus#Funding_campaign https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyages_of_Christopher_Columbu...
  - scarface74 3y ago
    It didn’t help the slaves or the people being colonized…