• Eiri@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    I wonder what would happen. Let’s say 10,000 people.

    Let’s say some extremist, highly organized group manages to successfully assassinate the 10,000 richest people in the world, and then disappears without a trace.

    I’m guessing those people would all be succeeded by their next of kin. Would that cause a wave of change or…?

    • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I think a more efficient tactic would be to, once a month, execute the person with the highest net worth. Billionaires would be scrambling to get rid of their money

    • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      You’re correct. It would cause some disruption and a lot of joy, but system would continue. It need to be overthrown entirely and new one built. That is, proletarian revolution is needed.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Let’s say some extremist, highly organized group manages to successfully assassinate the 10,000 richest people in the world, and then disappears without a trace.

      The problem is that these billionaires profit the most from a system of resource exploitation, but they do not benefit exclusively. We’d still have hundreds of billions of dollars in fossil fuel centric infrastructure that we’d need to replace and reconfigure. And that reconfiguration would require a national organized effort.

      Ultimate, you can’t just wave a wand and make Rich People Go Away. You need a national project that is both popular and efficient. One that reduces emissions while improving quality of life. You need a Green New Deal.

      That’s not something you can affect purely from subtraction.

    • InputZero@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      20 hours ago

      You’d have to also threaten to assassinate their inheritors from taking the estate, or just take the estate. Either way that’s violence. The question then becomes is it okay to use the Master’s tools to build your own house, to which my answer is no I can’t. I can use the Master’s tools to tear down their own houses. I may be a bit too idealistic though.

  • zcd@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    A little billionaire cocktail math for you. Each billionaire emits in the neighbourhood of 1 million times more CO2 than the average person. So you streetcar just 3000 or so billionaires and that’s the equivalent of reducing the earth’s population by about 3 billion. Can’t really think of anything greener

    • tyler@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 day ago

      Not that I don’t believe you but I’d love to cite this in future discussions, where did you get your stats from?

    • tee9000@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Thats their investments, not their personal use. According to your source anyway.

    • Sbauer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      20 hours ago

      The emissions from their investments … thats the same as the emissions of your place of work or the emissions of the company you buy your stuff from. Lets blame that on an extremely small group of people instead of the billions of people who consume the products enabling them.

      • tee9000@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Yep there might be plenty we disagree with regarding their investments and their affect on the environment but we are just lying to ourselves to say people arent making a living due to some of those investments, having our lives enriched, and generally benefitting us in ways we would demand to keep if they were all magically erased.

        Kind of useless to talk about this in any way to come to a sentimental conclusion though because we arent looking at a distribution of data to inform us what generates the most environmental impact and how much value we actually get from it each investment. Its just a big ambigious number until we look into it. Which we wont. Because nobody here actually cares enough.

        • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Honestly it’s a form of depoliticization because it’s not a serious proposal with any realistic chance of success. It distracts people from getting engaged with real politics and actually making a difference. And at the end of the day, isn’t that exactly what the billionaires want?

  • fin@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’ve seen this meme a while ago and I saw someone saying he wants to run over the billionaires back and forth to make sure they’re dead and I deeply agree with that.

  • don@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    1 day ago

    Put a sniper on top of the cart in case the switchman gets bought out. Ain’t taking no chances.

    • onlooker@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Exactly. There’s no moral dillema here. I’m keeping the switch in the “left” position and welding it in place, just in case.