4 ms·
Why don’t we ratchet the Overton Window a bit further and introduce the term “economic rape” when you force product into an economy. That’s bound to produce som
by kortilla 3y ago
Why don’t we ratchet the Overton Window a bit further and introduce the term “economic rape” when you force product into an economy. That’s bound to produce some useful discussions.
- mandmandam 3y agoDude, poisoning people is violent. Fucking up their economy for profit is violent. What is complicated about that?
- kortilla 3y agoDon’t be obtuse. When people say “economic violence” they aren’t referring to poisoning. There are two things in discussion: - the “economic violence” of food relief programs because it makes it hard for local farmers. - high arsenic levels in US rice
- mandmandam 3y agoBoth of those things were addressed - in tfa, by OP, and by me. Both are perfectly valid uses of the word violent. Stunned that people are defending this tbh. American exceptionalism is a hell of a drug.
- kortilla 3y agoIt’s not exceptionalism, it’s perspective. Anyone who has been exposed to actual economic violence (severe embargoes, depression collapses, hyper inflation, etc) sees writing like this and discredits the author for being an out of touch desk warrior. >Stunned that people are defending this tbh. It’s frankly shocking that you think deriding the author for calling food programs “economic violence” is defending this scenario. Take a step back and realize that multiple things can be wrong at once.
- chaps 3y agoOr we could stop bike shedding here and just try to understand the intent of the written words.
- kortilla 3y agoIt’s not bike shedding. It makes the writer look like an emotional moron when they use terms like “economic violence” for an export program that disrupts one small industry. Do you consider cheese exports from France to be economic violence against Wisconsin?
- chaps 3y agoNot going to get involved in this any further because I still think you're bike shedding. Just -- there's some intense irony in saying someone looks like "emotional moron" to win an argument. Stones, glass houses, etc. But if France was knowingly shipping arsenic-laden cheese to the US in a way that displaced the local economy to the degree that the only available cheese is poison? That'd, at least, cause some violent diarrhea.
- kortilla 3y agoThe intent of the words is wrong, not the literal meaning. There is no violence to someone offering a cheaper product. You either don’t understand the meaning of “bike shedding” or you think one small portion of the economy struggling to compete on the price is “violent”. Either way, I think you’re confused about the definition of something pretty fundamentally. If it was really the choice between, “you’ll get poisoned and have violent diarrhea if you eat this cheaper option” or “keep buying the previous local option”, both options would stay available. So the point you tried to make really missed the mark. The way that arsenic rice could crush the local market is only if it had essentially no near to mid term side effects. If it was obvious people wouldn’t buy it.
- chaps 3y agoLol, friend. The "mark" I was trying to hit wasn't any point about arsenic or sickness. The entire point of that post was to use "violent" as a flavor word in an attempt to be clever to show that words are wibbly wobbly. Calm down and take a breath.