5 ms·

It's totally horrible for me to say this but a deadly flu pandemic is needed for the health of our economy. If it comes to that, I prefer a French Revolution s

It's totally horrible for me to say this but a deadly flu pandemic is needed for the health of our economy. If it comes to that, I prefer a French Revolution style class war. Fewer deaths, more gain for each death and in total, thus more efficient. Between 10 million deaths, no correlation between dying and deserving it, and chaos and no reason to believe in political progress, versus 200,000 deaths, a high correlation between dying and deserving it (i.e. higher death rates among the current elite) and the likely deposition of the corporate upper class, I know which one I'd pick. I'm not sure I agree with your premise-- I don't think society ever needs traumatic death, and I wouldn't want the violent revolution or the flu pandemic-- but if it were true, there's a much better way of getting it, which is to rise up and depose the assholes running the world now. I think the problem is related to what you are saying but much more prosaic. For the most part, humans are myopic and reactive, and the people who tend to rise in organizations (in peace time) are even more that way than the general population. They make shitty leaders, though, due to their lack of vision. The result is that, when there is progress, such people would rather cut costs (and involve fewer people) than do more. That, in a nutshell, is why Corporate America is so depressing: it's run by mindless cost-cutters, not leaders. Couple this with the mean-spiritedness of the US society and you have long-term joblessness and, eventually, widespread, cancerous poverty of a kind not seen since the 1930s.

busterarm 13y ago
Women got better quality jobs in the 30s/40s not because they were capable (they were) but because there was a shortage of men to do those jobs. Eventually those in control of a mean, sexist elite were forced to modify their perceptions because of economics. I'm ultimately just saying that the only thing that will force a mean, privileged elite to modify their perceptions will be economics. Class war sure would give my sense of vengeance a boner, but I think it's both less likely and much more risky for those who we'd like to benefit from it (at present).
- twoodfin 13y ago
  pg must be thrilled that this site has now devolved to the point where we talk longingly about putting entrepreneurs up against the wall.
  - busterarm 13y ago
    Well, there's healthy and unhealthy entrepreneurship. I'm sure patent trolls consider themselves entrepreneurs too. If someone is a greedy asshole at the expense of others, I have no problem advocating putting them up against the wall.
    - twoodfin 13y ago
      Well, there's healthy and unhealthy entrepreneurship. And how does a "class war" distinguish them?
      - busterarm 13y ago
        Sorry, I left my tea leaves and tarot cards at home. But French nobility continued through the Revolution into the 19th century and there about ~230 remaining noble families (present day) of which at least 130 were titled and had their titles officially restored in 1852. So in the most notable instance of class war at least, not everyone got the axe. The point you're asking me to respond to is a separate discussion entirely.
        twoodfin 13y ago
        So pg should be content to take his chances come the glorious revolution? I still don't get why you'd have a "boner" for indiscriminate killing of the successful, even if it's "merely" a random subset thereof. You say in another comment that you're just being "cheeky", but frankly I find your and michaelochurch's comments deeply disturbing. If it's just dorm room BS, perhaps you could find a more appropriate forum.
        busterarm 13y ago
magicalist 13y ago
> Between 10 million deaths, no correlation between dying and deserving it, and chaos and no reason to believe in political progress, versus 200,000 deaths, a high correlation between dying and deserving it (i.e. higher death rates among the current elite) and the likely deposition of the corporate upper class, I know which one I'd pick. While the most famous people executed during the French Revolution were from the aristocracy, the vast majority of people executed were not. Inciting rebellion and food hoarding were the common accusations. This source[1] puts it as 6.25% "nobles", 2% noblesse de robe, 14% upper-middle class, 10.5% lower-middle class, 6.5% clergy, 31.25% working class, 28% peasants, and 1% unidentified. I know you say "if it comes to that", but anyone wishing for a real revolution to enable some kind of social justice is deeply misguided. The poor and downtrodden may not be the first against the wall, but they will be there in much, much larger numbers. [1] http://www.jstor.org/stable/1881548 http://www.jstor.org/stable/1881548
- busterarm 13y ago
  They'd be there in larger numbers too with a pandemic due to availability of health care and also the closer proximity that lower-class people are forced to live near each other. Lower-classes get fucked in greater numbers when there is any social turmoil. They are a proportionately larger group of people. I don't have any numbers to look at but I think it's pretty likely that more than 60% of the French population during the Revolution was working class or peasants...so proportionately they may have fared better, because you have to look at their numbers in the population, not the percentages from who was killed. Anyway, the long-term social effect was (from where I'm sitting) positive.
  - magicalist 13y ago
    > Anyway, the long-term social effect was (from where I'm sitting) positive The positive social effects of...the Reign of Terror? You might as well throw in the Holodomor, the Khmer Rouge's Killing Fields, The Great Leap Forward, etc etc etc as everything's much better now than it was then. Post hoc ergo propter hoc, amirite?
    - 13y ago
renovaatio 13y ago
The problem is that our economic structure relies on continuous growth. As opposed to moste living systems, who reach a point of equilibrium somewhere. You know what living entity also relies on continuous growth? Cancer. We're cancer.

busterarm 13y ago

Women got better quality jobs in the 30s/40s not because they were capable (they were) but because there was a shortage of men to do those jobs. Eventually those in control of a mean, sexist elite were forced to modify their perceptions because of economics. I'm ultimately just saying that the only thing that will force a mean, privileged elite to modify their perceptions will be economics. Class war sure would give my sense of vengeance a boner, but I think it's both less likely and much more risky for those who we'd like to benefit from it (at present).

twoodfin 13y ago
pg must be thrilled that this site has now devolved to the point where we talk longingly about putting entrepreneurs up against the wall.
- busterarm 13y ago
  Well, there's healthy and unhealthy entrepreneurship. I'm sure patent trolls consider themselves entrepreneurs too. If someone is a greedy asshole at the expense of others, I have no problem advocating putting them up against the wall.
  - twoodfin 13y ago
    Well, there's healthy and unhealthy entrepreneurship. And how does a "class war" distinguish them?
    - busterarm 13y ago
      Sorry, I left my tea leaves and tarot cards at home. But French nobility continued through the Revolution into the 19th century and there about ~230 remaining noble families (present day) of which at least 130 were titled and had their titles officially restored in 1852. So in the most notable instance of class war at least, not everyone got the axe. The point you're asking me to respond to is a separate discussion entirely.
      - twoodfin 13y ago
        So pg should be content to take his chances come the glorious revolution? I still don't get why you'd have a "boner" for indiscriminate killing of the successful, even if it's "merely" a random subset thereof. You say in another comment that you're just being "cheeky", but frankly I find your and michaelochurch's comments deeply disturbing. If it's just dorm room BS, perhaps you could find a more appropriate forum.
        busterarm 13y ago

magicalist 13y ago

> Between 10 million deaths, no correlation between dying and deserving it, and chaos and no reason to believe in political progress, versus 200,000 deaths, a high correlation between dying and deserving it (i.e. higher death rates among the current elite) and the likely deposition of the corporate upper class, I know which one I'd pick. While the most famous people executed during the French Revolution were from the aristocracy, the vast majority of people executed were not. Inciting rebellion and food hoarding were the common accusations. This source[1] puts it as 6.25% "nobles", 2% noblesse de robe, 14% upper-middle class, 10.5% lower-middle class, 6.5% clergy, 31.25% working class, 28% peasants, and 1% unidentified. I know you say "if it comes to that", but anyone wishing for a real revolution to enable some kind of social justice is deeply misguided. The poor and downtrodden may not be the first against the wall, but they will be there in much, much larger numbers. [1] http://www.jstor.org/stable/1881548 http://www.jstor.org/stable/1881548

busterarm 13y ago
They'd be there in larger numbers too with a pandemic due to availability of health care and also the closer proximity that lower-class people are forced to live near each other. Lower-classes get fucked in greater numbers when there is any social turmoil. They are a proportionately larger group of people. I don't have any numbers to look at but I think it's pretty likely that more than 60% of the French population during the Revolution was working class or peasants...so proportionately they may have fared better, because you have to look at their numbers in the population, not the percentages from who was killed. Anyway, the long-term social effect was (from where I'm sitting) positive.
- magicalist 13y ago
  > Anyway, the long-term social effect was (from where I'm sitting) positive The positive social effects of...the Reign of Terror? You might as well throw in the Holodomor, the Khmer Rouge's Killing Fields, The Great Leap Forward, etc etc etc as everything's much better now than it was then. Post hoc ergo propter hoc, amirite?
  - 13y ago

renovaatio 13y ago

The problem is that our economic structure relies on continuous growth. As opposed to moste living systems, who reach a point of equilibrium somewhere. You know what living entity also relies on continuous growth? Cancer. We're cancer.