We have the means to end every form of inequality out there. We would just have to come together as world to make it happen. But no. We’re basically monkeys with nukes.
Which is why, as a species, we deserve everything coming our way.
Glad to see another person who recognizes that, at a basic level, this is something ingrained in our species. I wish I understood where greed originates within our nature and how to eliminate it, but history demonstrates that this has always and will always be part of who we are.
I think Terminator 2 put it best: We’re programmed to destroy ourselves.
That said, at least here in my own small sphere, I see some lovely examples of kindness. There’s a donut shop nearby that puts all the unsold stuff in a box at the end of the day and leaves it out for the homeless, or really, anyone that walks by and wants to take one.
That’s how well capitalism has succeeded in making us believe its definition of human nature as a greedy creature is the only one definition. As if it is unquestionably true. Capitalism is a system that eventually destroys itself, that is what you are witnessing. Human nature is not defined as such. We are codependent rational animals, programmed for sharing and caring. Not to be greedy.
I would be careful with that logic. Yes, we’re social animals. But a case could be made we’re every bit the sociopathic apes that you’re attributing to capitalist conditioning.
Yes, ancient pre-agrarian societies were socialist/communistic. Property mostly shared communally. Land ownership not really a thing. General egalitarianism. But that was WITHIN THE GROUP. Sure, we shared well with those in our family or clan, but inter-group conflict was brutal. The portion of people in these ancient societies that met violent deaths is orders of magnitude more than our current world.
If I were to describe and generalize how ancient societies behaved, it would be “saintly socialism to those in the group, murderous cannibalism to those outside the group.”
I recommend you to read Rutger Bregman’s Humankind: A Hopeful History. And David Graeber’s the Dawn of Everything.
Not that their arguments end all discussion on this. But the clear-cut definition of humans as inherently greedy creatures is also not set in stone as capitalism/liberalism likes us to believe.
It would be quite the philosophical revolution if we had a final definition of human nature. So no, we cannot say: looking at history we must conclude that humans are inherently greedy, no further discussion.
Individuals fall to temptation all the time. The issue isn’t humans, it’s the shape of our structures. If only a handful of people are the lynch pin to everything, they’re eventually gonna be corrupted by the power. Spreading the power out and not allowing it to coalesce is the answer.
The humans with spread out power weren’t bombastic, so they make for uninteresting reads of history. But those stories are out there, of communities quietly thriving in all times.
You should read Mutual Aid: a Factor in Evolution by Piotr Kropotkin.
Things do not need to be this way, and it is not “in our nature”.
Survival of the fittest, i.e. individual competition, is not the only way organisms evolve (and then thrive) in the world. And that includes, but it’s not limited to, humans.
We have the means to end every form of inequality out there. We would just have to come together as world to make it happen. But no. We’re basically monkeys with nukes.
Which is why, as a species, we deserve everything coming our way.
A tragic misstep in evolution.
Glad to see another person who recognizes that, at a basic level, this is something ingrained in our species. I wish I understood where greed originates within our nature and how to eliminate it, but history demonstrates that this has always and will always be part of who we are.
I think Terminator 2 put it best: We’re programmed to destroy ourselves.
That said, at least here in my own small sphere, I see some lovely examples of kindness. There’s a donut shop nearby that puts all the unsold stuff in a box at the end of the day and leaves it out for the homeless, or really, anyone that walks by and wants to take one.
That’s how well capitalism has succeeded in making us believe its definition of human nature as a greedy creature is the only one definition. As if it is unquestionably true. Capitalism is a system that eventually destroys itself, that is what you are witnessing. Human nature is not defined as such. We are codependent rational animals, programmed for sharing and caring. Not to be greedy.
I would be careful with that logic. Yes, we’re social animals. But a case could be made we’re every bit the sociopathic apes that you’re attributing to capitalist conditioning.
Yes, ancient pre-agrarian societies were socialist/communistic. Property mostly shared communally. Land ownership not really a thing. General egalitarianism. But that was WITHIN THE GROUP. Sure, we shared well with those in our family or clan, but inter-group conflict was brutal. The portion of people in these ancient societies that met violent deaths is orders of magnitude more than our current world.
If I were to describe and generalize how ancient societies behaved, it would be “saintly socialism to those in the group, murderous cannibalism to those outside the group.”
Yes I agree this case can be made. Many cases can be made.
This one about the in- and out group is a lot more convincing than just “humans are programmed to destroy themselves”.
I’d love to believe that, but I’ve read too many history books.
I recommend you to read Rutger Bregman’s Humankind: A Hopeful History. And David Graeber’s the Dawn of Everything.
Not that their arguments end all discussion on this. But the clear-cut definition of humans as inherently greedy creatures is also not set in stone as capitalism/liberalism likes us to believe.
It would be quite the philosophical revolution if we had a final definition of human nature. So no, we cannot say: looking at history we must conclude that humans are inherently greedy, no further discussion.
If you find that comforting, then great. Genuinely happy for you.
I genuinely feel sorry for you
I appreciate it.
Individuals fall to temptation all the time. The issue isn’t humans, it’s the shape of our structures. If only a handful of people are the lynch pin to everything, they’re eventually gonna be corrupted by the power. Spreading the power out and not allowing it to coalesce is the answer.
The humans with spread out power weren’t bombastic, so they make for uninteresting reads of history. But those stories are out there, of communities quietly thriving in all times.
You should read Mutual Aid: a Factor in Evolution by Piotr Kropotkin.
Things do not need to be this way, and it is not “in our nature”.
Survival of the fittest, i.e. individual competition, is not the only way organisms evolve (and then thrive) in the world. And that includes, but it’s not limited to, humans.
I don’t have any nukes and i’m not a monkey, talk for yourself
Do you need help understanding elementary abstractions?