4 ms·
The state has motivation to self preserve, so is unlikely to suck a population dry. Making the state the only source of fuckery then means fuckery won't kill us
by Grimblewald 3y ago
The state has motivation to self preserve, so is unlikely to suck a population dry. Making the state the only source of fuckery then means fuckery won't kill us. Opening up access to population wide fuckery to the highest bidder however is different. The highest bidder does not care for the life and well-being of the livestock, they care to see their investment pay off.
While I don't agree china has it right, both approaches are wrong as humans are not livestock, we shouldn't even treat livestock the way we do, the Chinese approach is like choosing to sell 50% of all children born while Twitter is like selling as many children as buyers will take.
- thfuran 3y ago>Making the state the only source of fuckery then means fuckery won't kill us. Quite right. No government has ever killed anyone, directly or indirectly.
- Grimblewald 3y agoI wouldn't say anyone but they certainly haven't killed everyone
- thfuran 3y agoAs opposed to the tech companies, which have done?
- Grimblewald 3y agoTech companies haven't been around long enough to have that level of impact but if corporate behaviour in general is any indication, then big oil for example is a pretty strong example of why we cannot let private entities act without strict oversight.