3 ms·
It’s a matter of degree. We often put people in the position where they need to do some pretty terrible, degrading work just to eat. In my view as the alternati
by BriggyDwiggs42 3y ago
It’s a matter of degree. We often put people in the position where they need to do some pretty terrible, degrading work just to eat. In my view as the alternatives you have get worse, it gets less morally questionable to steal. Furthermore, I think it should largely be evaluated by the harm it does to others, e.g. stealing a car from a sheltered rich person who can afford an uber in an emergency does them much less harm than from a poor person, who may not be able to get to work and put food on the table. Im not even saying it’s fine to steal the rich person’s car, just relatively okay. Thieves are definitely selfish, but so is everyone else in our free market system. We consider it a virtue when the right people do it.
Look, most of the time I agree that like, fuck thieves. I just also agree think that the underlying issues are inequality, alienation, and other socioeconomic shit, and that condemning thieves morally is counterproductive because it distracts from the useful changes to prevent them from becoming thieves.
- pdonis 3y ago> Thieves are definitely selfish, but so is everyone else in our free market system. In a free market, all transactions are voluntary. "Selfishness" just means that you only agree to a transaction if it benefits you. But the other party will only agree if it benefits them, so it's a win-win. Thievery, OTOH, is not voluntary for the victim, and is, at best, a win-lose. Not at all the same as a free market transaction.