Good thing we (the US) lost the war, or this lady would probably have her own team of lobbyists running their country.
The death penalty is always wrong.
Murder is not a punishment and once you’ve stripped her of her ill-got gains there is no longer any reason to kill her.I hear you but if I’m honest, and tomorrow America announced it was going to execute every billionaire, I’m not going to put up too much of a protest.
Take the money, sure. Then they’re no longer billionaires and there’s no need to kill them.
In other words, you don’t murder disarmed prisoners of war.
During class war they are the enemy and deserve what comes to them. If taken alive and their weapon of war removed, they don’t need to be dealt with the same way.
Once they are no longer a threat you can work on rehabilitation and restitution.
First off, I agree with you.
But…second…I struggle with the rehabilitation bit. Some people cannot be rehabilitated. It is a hard truth I have learned, coupled with pain and regret, many times in my life. I’m just curious what you think the course of action should be at that point?
I’m not suggesting death/murder, but I do struggle with the idea that if they’re miserable, and the people around them are made miserable, and the people trying to help them are made miserable…what do you do?
You do everything you can for them (whilst making sure they’re not a danger to other people), give the caretakers / wardens plenty of time off, and you give them the option for assisted suicide. In my ideal world, everyone would have the option for assisted suicide though
Some people cannot be rehabilitated.
You can’t know that. You only have evidence for people’s inability to’ve been rehabilitated so far.
I’m just curious what you think the course of action should be at that point?
Not murder.
if they’re miserable, and the people around them are made miserable, and the people trying to help them are made miserable…what do you do?
…drugs?
The way these people affect so many lives negatively with their fraud is much worse than a person committing murder.
The literal misery they cause to so many people for their own benefit without a fucking iota of shame and their sociopathic behavior is enough to consider eliminating them from society.
The way these people affect so many lives negatively with their fraud is much worse than a person committing murder.
Irrespective how is two bad things better than one bad thing? I would think fewer bad things would be net better.
The literal misery they cause to so many people for their own benefit without a fucking iota of shame and their sociopathic behavior is enough to consider eliminating them from society.
You speak of “sociopathic behavior” while advocating state murder. 🤨
I know. It sounds fucked. But these people are a cancer on society. There’s very little that can be done to reform these people. And the problem is that capitalism rewards this kind of behaviour.
These people currently are ruling the world. If they aren’t the head of some large company, there the head of a government. Because of their large wealth, they have a huge influence on the policies. They’re basically dictating the laws that are governing them. It’s like playing Monopoly with your own made up rules.
You can’t stop those people any other way. The French understood this. When the price of food was out of reach, heads started to roll. Literally. Nowadays the people can’t be violent anymore. Heck, the mere act of peacefully protesting is met with police violence and oppression. How the fuck are we supposed to get the message across when those people have their own militia protecting them and their interests?
There’s very little that can be done to reform these people.
Nothing you have tried so far.
How the fuck are we supposed to get the message across when those people have their own militia protecting them and their interests?
Have you ever considered “Progaganda Of The Deed” to encompass modeling being better people than the opposition?
That’s the problem. There’s one side that’s trying to play by the rules and be nice because they have empathy. Then there’s the other side who lie, cheat, and break the rules for their own benefit without shame.
How the hell are you supposed to play the game and “be better” than the opposition, when the opposition is taking advantage of you?
There has to be clear and grave consequences to discourage them from abusing the system and the people. If it has to be the death penalty, then so be it.
I’m tired of our societies being run by a bunch of industry barons who own everything. Food barons, healthcare barons, banking barons, housing barons, you name it. The mega conglomerates that we can’t escape from who are literally destroying this planet and leeching off of everybody with made up excuses about the state of the “economy”. Having all the world’s fortune in the hands of about 10 people. We can’t stop this by playing nice and asking nicely. Not when they control governments with their financial influence or because they’ve become too big to fail. No. You build fucking guillotines and you execute the motherfuckers.
How the hell are you supposed to play the game and “be better” than the opposition, when the opposition is taking advantage of you?
You do that by not murdering them after you have taken power and over the means of production.
Having all the world’s fortune in the hands of about 10 people. We can’t stop this by playing nice and asking nicely.
Alright so you’ve seized all the money in the world and taken over all the land and machinery that enables production through the application of labor via militant witholding of the same. You and your comrades have all the guns.
…why at that point do you need to use those guns to murder people who are no longer holding murderous control over those common resources?
I refuse to acquiesce to or defend a system of belief that requires people die.
Once you win, you don’t kill or you never had moral authority to employ violence in pursuit of winning in the first place.
fraud is much worse than a person committing murder
you may be right but that’s still no reason to murder them
Up vote for use of iota correctly
I disagree. I don’t subscribe to a world view where every life is sacred. Society has a right to protect itself from persons that will always endanger other people and that includes killing them. However, it has been quite clear that we cannot guarantee that no innocent people are killed. And that’s why I’m OK with the death penalty only in principle, not in practice.
persons that will always endanger other people and that includes killing them.
You cannot know that, and if you have the ability to strap someone down and end their life, you have no need to do so since you clearly have complete control over their person.
I’m OK with the death penalty only in principle
You shouldn’t be. States qua arbiters of justice should not intentionally kill people under their control.
This is a discussion about personal morals. Some people think it’s OK to execute some criminals, others are completely opposed to that idea. There is no objective right or wrong here.
For you your arguments might be compelling, but they don’t convince me. I can have complete control over someone and still decide to kill them because I don’t want to bother with locking them up, for example. And who says a society should not kill? That’s not even an argument, just an opinion.
There is no objective right or wrong here.
No, the state killing people is objectively wrong.
Fucking lol. I love Lemmy. I’ve never seen such an obscure group of people speak in absolutes so consistently. Puts reddit to shame.
“I WILL DECIDE WHAT IS RIGHT OR WRONG”
“I WILL DECIDE WHAT IS GOOD OR EVIL”
“I WILL DECIDE WHAT IS RIGHT OR WRONG”
I don’t decide. The state murdering people is wrong. I just have the moral wherewithal to recognize the fact.
Which isn’t hard because it’s objectively true.
Hope this helps.
deleted by creator
Ok, I’ll play along for a bit.
The state murdering people is wrong.
Prove it is wrong. Use facts and data to prove capital punishment is wrong.
you don’t keep that control over billionaires.their money has too much loyalty.
so they need to be killed. I do agree that the state shouldn’t be making the decision, but Vietnam is weird and still at least dresses up as communist.
you don’t keep that control over billionaires.their money has too much loyalty.
Once you take the money they aren’t billionaires anymore.
but money is just an idea; easier to put a bullet in them than rewrite the entire social perception of them.
It’s easier to put bullets in things than to do alot of things, what’s your point?
It’s easier to shoot someone than to change your sheets but it doesn’t make your bed smell less of piss.
it takes seconds, other way takes years, and its not worth risking it getting away. it’s not human anymore, and its a danger to humans, so if its not down for trying to be human again; kill it. don’t waste the effort when there are living people who need help.
Taking their money away isn’t enough. These billionaires often have deep connections to people who could easily help them regain their wealth and power. I’m not sure what the answer is but taking the money won’t solve the problem in every case.
These billionaires often have deep connections to people who could easily help them regain their wealth and power.
So take their money too.
While I agree in principle I tend to think there are still unforgivable crimes and irredeemable people out there.
While I agree in principle I tend to think there are still unforgivable crimes and irredeemable people out there.
Then you don’t agree.
I wasn’t aware crime was about forgiveness.
I thought in-so-far as societies implemented systems of justice, their purpose was restitution and rehabilitiation.No one gains anything from a person—irrespective their prior actions—being murdered and we all lose a bit of our soul each time a state execution is allowed to take place.
I really expected better from Vietnam, whose “quarantine at gunpoint” public health policies I heartily endorse.
Alright. I DON’T agree.
Alright. I DON’T agree.
You should; death as a post-hoc punishment is abhorrent and serves no one.
I still don’t agree.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
then you don’t agree
Allow me some cognitive dissonance because I really don’t know what society should do about psychopaths, predators, or cases like those execs who put melamine into milk to spoof the protein metrics, leading to the horrible deaths of a large number of babies.
Holding them indefinitely is a useless drain on the state, killing them leads to the inevitability of innocent people dying.
Allow me some cognitive dissonance
Not if you use it to advocate state murder I won’t.
killing them leads to the inevitability of innocent people dying.
Innocent people will always have the ability to die, no matter how many people your state murders.
If child predators get executed, I don’t lose “a bit of my soul”, I gain more confidence that the world is now a better place.
I gain more confidence that the world is now a better place.
Oh word? Did the horrific thing they did no longer happen?
They won’t repeat the horrific thing they did while dead, that’s for sure.
I’m against the death penalty but it’s not hard to see why some people support it.
I’m against the death penalty but
Shut the fuck up. If there’s a “but” ever then no the fuck you are not.
They won’t repeat the horrific thing they did while dead
Did the original horrific thing not happen? Does murder ameliorate past suffering in any way?
Vengeance is not justice, it is sick.
Child predators have recidivism rates of 10-35% depending on which studies you’re reading. Each one of those assaults is a potentially life-altering trauma induced in a child. Exactly how many should someone be able to do before we consider they’re not going to be rehabilitated?
A life in prison and state sanctioned execution are different, though.
It’s also worth considering why these criminals are criminals. If they were, say, violently abused as a child themselves…does that matter? Functionally, it doesn’t matter to the victim — I get that. But should the state be in the business of executing such people?
But should the state be in the business of executing such people?
Honestly I’ve always felt this was the strongest argument against a death penalty. That said the argument carries nearly the same weight for life imprisonment, and still some for the act of imprisonment at all. We continue to trust juries of fools to judge people to this day, but that is still unfortunately more palatable than giving the right to someone to unilaterally choose your jury.
I’m onboard with a culture of reform and education for convicts because it works, but I also recognize some people cannot be reformed and keeping them imprisoned is needlessly dangerous for many parties. There needs to be a line where we accept someone is too far gone.
Each one of those assaults is a potentially life-altering trauma induced in a child.
Don’t tell me what being abused as a child does to someone, thanks.
Does killing the person who did it make the assault not have happened?
It’s not just about the assault that happened, it’s also about the risk of considerable harm in the future. Killing someone for one act of sexual predation is going to be considered extreme by many but not all people. But what happens after the second or third times? How many is too many?
Of course it doesn’t, that’s such a condescending question.
The obvious response is that the perpetrator has a 0% chance of reoffending if they’re executed and that does carry weight with a lot of people.
Is that equivalent to 65% don’t reoffend? Or am I misunderstanding the recidivism rate?
Yes, which is why my question isn’t just rhetorical. How many is too many? You could make a case for 1 (if you believe the crime is too heinous), or 2 (if you believe in second chances), or 3+ even. But where do you draw the line and accept someone isn’t going to stop?
I’m not even going to dignify this response. Have a nice day
I’m not even going to dignify this response.
That’s a response.
Have a nice day
Thank you. It’ll indeed be much nicer without you advocating state murder in it. 🙂
I wish, one day I will be as cool as you.
And if an innocent person gets executed for the crime?
And do you think these child predators had charming upbringings? Or perhaps they were filled with horrors and trauma?
Yeah, there are absolutely evil people out there, and if you think the state should execute them, that’s your opinion. But to think that all heinous crimes come from a vacuum is naive.
Huh. At least where I am from “Death penalty for child predators” is a common far-right talking point.
You’ve exposed me! I don’t sympathize with child predators, so I must be a Nazi!
the death penalty is always wrong, billionaires should die in unpredictable extrajudicial ways. like aneurisms, pianos, etc.
but its something.
While celebrating a billionaire getting their just desserts is always fun, not really sure that this is a reflection of the decency of the Vietnamese government.
Since there’s no rational hope of addressing the other 3k or so billionaire parasites on Earth without building a really big Titanic wreckage tour sub and making little paths of stock certificates leading to it like reese’s pieces in ET, I’ll take whatever incidental vicarious revenge against humanity’s oppressors I can get.
I mean, celebrate the revenge, for sure. Just don’t mistake it for decency. Vietnam is about as corrupt as India.
We’re no less corrupt in the US, merely more expensive.
Our cheats just hire lobbyists to make their corrupt practices legal, shout out to Citizens United, and/or hire enough lawyers to make the consequences meaningless, like fining a company that makes billions a year thousands for profitable criminal activity.
Our “solution” to corruption is simply to make it legal for the right price. Donald Trump should have lost his empire and gone to jail for his business practices long before he was a game show host, let alone POTUS, but he learned and inherited enough from daddy to understand how to wield American style corruption, and he’s still free.
We’re no less corrupt in the US, merely more expensive.
We’re very corrupt in the US. That’s not the same as being corrupt to the same degree. I… would encourage looking into the relative corruption of countries. We, in the US, are near the bottom of the the list as far as developed countries go (beaten out by only such luminaries as Italy and Greece), but we aren’t even close to as bad as it can get. We’re just more aware of our own corruption than of other countries. I mean, we are Americans. We’re barely aware of the existence of other countries, much less their corruption.
I can’t get behind a government giving the death penalty to anybody for any reason
Since when is it leftist to support the death penalty, let alone take glee in it. This is like the boomer FB shit
I’m against the death penalty in general, but I also acknowledge that in terms of tangible damage to humanity, any billionaire walking the Earth makes any serial killer who has ever walked the Earth seem positively quaint by scale.
I also recognize that we are living under class occupation. The owner class handily won the class war by convincing most of the developed world not to fight it half a century ago.
The peasants don’t have the luxury of taking prisoners. We are the losers of a war, in spite of the fact that many have come to worship their occupying oppressors.
Keeping the most destructive humans locked away and well fed until they die of natural causes is a peacetime luxury for those in charge, and unless you’re holding a reprehensible amount of capital, that isn’t us. You might believe we are in peacetime, but if we refuse to stop them, and it looks that way, they will force our shared, communal habitat to stop us all through their insatiable, sociopathic avarice.
We love to think we’re not, but we’re still subjects wholly dependant on this world, even the owners activily attacking us and it simultaneously.
well fucking said.
The French revolution shows that the guilotines don’t necessarily stop when the aristocrats are all dead. I’m not enthusiastic about mob justice
Yeah, I know a lot of Republicans that claim the left is only on their “high horse” when it suits them. I still don’t believe that, but this thread really helps me understand where they got this notion of duplicity. Not a good look. SMH
I 100 % oppose the existence of Billionaires but not murdering people for being rich. History is littered with the monstrous actions of mobs thinking they were slaying a beast. We should always be wary of simplistic, violent final solutions
The peasants don’t have the luxury of taking prisoners.
I mean, why not? POWs have their own self-evident advantages, as we’ve seen taking place in palestine right now. Hostages are a pretty good thing to have if you want to create a long term negotiating strategy with other people.
But also, if you get rid of the billioinaire’s billions, then you get rid of the billionaire. Now you just have a 'naire. Maybe a thousandaire, or something. Like, all the rich people that fled from cuba to florida didn’t really end up doing a whole lot with their lives except being mad and super bitter about the fact that they weren’t able to keep participating in a fascist government that oppressed the people. Most of them were petite bourgeois anyways. It’s the ones that refused to leave that you end up murdering by way of this being the only thing that can force them to leave.
None of that is really similar to this situation at all, even, this is just an independent government killing someone that realistically could have no recourse if they were just completely stripped of their money and sent off to go fuck around in some other country. It’s also, to me, kind of an illustration of the divide that you conceive of prison as a “way to keep the most destructive humans locked away and well fed until they die of natural causes”. There’s, ideally, a greater purpose to prison beyond that. You’re justifying this by conceiving of this as like, a “war”, an extreme war, a life or death war, oooh it’s a war, wartime wartime wartime, but then, the police do the same thing when they justify shooting some guy on the street.
I dunno, this strikes me as a lot of nice sounding guilt-assuaging talk, as good rhetoric, but you haven’t really given me any logical argumentation to chew on here, as to why this would be good or why this had to be done, really.
I mean, why not?
Because with the apparent exception of Vietnam, billionaires run the show in the society they live in. They use their capital, which is just an expression of power, to change laws, buy courts, shift responsibility to their corporate entities that receive a cute lil meaningless fine that costs less than the profit of the crime instead of prison time, and here in the US they even literally OWN and PROFIT off many of our prisons. That’s the primary reason billionaires shouldn’t exist, because it’s close to impossible to put a check on such insane levels of power, which again, at those quantities, is what capital becomes, raw power. You can’t have a functioning representative democracy where people can grow so wealthy that their power over society extends beyond their single vote.
Most of the peasants in the world are subject to their respective judicial systems and prison systems largely configured to protect PROPERTY rights over human rights by design of those they work for, and guess who that is?
There are beautiful exceptions, the Nordic nations come to mind, but sadly my country, the US, has been spreading its greed disease for decades. We toppled south American rigimes daring to make something better to keep their markets open for our capitalists to rape using our military industrial complex, and we’ve been converting Europe with our greed disease a little at a time(YOU can live larger than you’ve ever dreamed, foreign legislator, just betray your countrymen for our profit!), the UK has fallen to it, the French are fighting it but losing, etc.
It is perfectly reasonable to oppose the death penalty, but the foundational event of the modern left movement was people chopping off a king’s head.
I’m against the death penalty on the grounds that I don’t want the government to have the authority to kill because they keep fucking it up. Either they get the wrong person or botch the execution.
There’s no question that a person is a billionaire.
Since you can’t make a revolution with white gloves.
The term “leftist” is too broad and “death penalty” too loosely defined.
Auth-leftists definitely support the death penalty, as in a powerful state should have authority to kill.
Anarchists don’t think there should be a state therefore there is no body authorized to kill. If someone must die, it would be at the hands of an individual or an ad-hoc grouping and be called “self-defense”.
Thinking things can change without the 0.1% being killed at all is a liberal idea.
This is like the boomer FB shit
Welcome to Lemmy!
billionaires aren’t people. their existence requires a river of blood, and they all deserve death, regardless of the states opinion.
I think its good to remind them they can be killed. I think they forget.
Is someone with $900 million a person without a river of blood to their name?
probably not. but let’s try to be real careful about killing innocent people here
The idea (or my opinion at least) is we start at the top, working our way down the high score list. After the first few, hopefully the rest come to their senses and voluntarily stop being scum.
People are always looking up, so they think about themselves as the little guy. Meanwhile people with smart phones and designer clothes are wading through a river of blood themselves, but they don’t look down, so they don’t see it. Reality is, if you live in America or Europe there’s a good chance you’re in the top 10% of global wealth. So when I hear this sentiment that we should start chopping from the top, I always notice how they think the chopping should stop right before it gets to their neck. Oh and look who that would leave on top… Interesting.
Fun sentiment but there’s no way to exist without participating in capitalism. My smart phone may be made with slave labor but it’s not like there are alternatives. Even if there were they’d be unaffordable.
If you can’t see the massive difference between a handful of billionaires causing the suffering in the world to become richer, and the hundreds of millions of people who are just participating in capitalism because there’s no other choice, then there’s no point in talking to you.
I can absolutely see the difference, just like the Vietnamese factory workers can see the difference between them and you claiming you have to buy an iPhone. In a billionaire’s world, what they’re doing is the norm. Do I think they have a responsibility to wake up and smell their bullshit? Absolutely.Their actions hurt many people and it’s inexcusable. But doesn’t that ring a little hollow if I’m not willing to do the same?
Up to $999,999,999.99 you’re in the clear!
Got a penny in my left hand and a knife in my right.
You can put me in whatever category you like. I still want to see the 1% hang.
People are extremely bitter that rich people exist, and openly would call for their deaths, regardless of however much their lives would actually improve, were they to die, or however much their oppression might continue under a more conventional arrangement, or a less, sort of, offensive level of wealth inequality. People do find it offensive, basically, they find it ostentatious, and what’s more commonly called for, to be put to death, than ostentatiousness? Than the offense of sensibilities?
I dunno. You get a lot of hard talk from supposed leftists who understand nothing of the kind of core principles at play, but none of them will realistically do anything, they’re just floating by and passively regurgitating whatever they consume in the spectacle. They lack the empathy to commit real violence or change, I think.
They lack the empathy to commit real violence
The poor aren’t strong enough to kill. That’s why I have to. New Batman villain was just created.
I think that’s just bane
bane and league of shadows in the movie are more return to monkey than this new villain.
This new villain just wants to kill rich people, and Bruce happens to fall into the crossfire.
I assume comic book bane just loves green steroids or something.
It always stops at the death of the rich. The money they have doesn’t magically go into the public coffers to be distributed for the benefit of those who need it. It’s all just grievance and schadenfreude rather than a way to change up the structure of power.
Interesting if you read about it, while many were found guilty I think only a woman is being sentences to death while many men are just getting a decade in prison for their involvement in it.
If she was the ringleader, sure… I guess (not that it makes the state’s murdering of folks alright). But odd that she gets death while all the men don’t even get 20 in jail.
look, could it be better? yes. is it nothing? no.
Or is it the state just protecting and strengthening itself while using language to pretend it is on the side of the people?
The state will never execute, or legislate, our way to a better society.
youre not wrong, but sometimes they kill a billionaire to look good, and that doesn’t take us to a worse society.
like how the USSR drastically raised standards of living for the working class in the american empire just by existing. they didn’t mean to. they didn’t care. it was just a side effect of their dick waving.
Only the heartland.
And indirectly.
Much as it also lowered the standard of living across much of Africa and Central Asia due to the proxy wars and coups.
Plus normalising executions does make the world worse.
I’m not saying its generally good. I’m saying the bad guys are killing each other, hooray!
I’d much rather it happened to it without warning, just an RPG to its helicopter or some hero with a knife out of an alley, I feel like the effect of that would be better, but this isn’t a bad thing.
Edit: I’m being harsh, you’re just having fun. Internet misses tone of voice, so it’s easy to be at off wires, I’m being too nitpick and I’d probably agree if we spoke face to face. Sorry for being an online argumentative berk. Enjoy your day.
Original: Bad guys? 🤨
Even Thatcher and Reagan had families.Always remember: the means are the ends.
in my experience, monsters having families should not be a point of sympathy.
they dont tend to treat us well. we’re usually better off without.
deleted by creator
I don’t think we should have billionaires but celebrating state sponsored murder is fucking gross
Lol too bad. Eat the rich
/s ?
But that’s the only murder that’s socially acceptable!
I wish it were…
Normalize killing billionaires! (for legal reasons this is a joke)
You forgot war
“We” isn’t this the case of other billionaires getting mad at one billionaire?
Maybe we can trigger a feeding frenzy…
Not a fan of the death penalty
Me neither, but killing some of the capitalist class has always been part of leftist revolutions so I can let this one slide.
I don’t think the state having the power to round people up and kill them, even if I don’t like the people it is being done to. It seems really dangerous.
Me neither. Except in cases where I support it.
Seems like a waste of energy and labor. Put that capitalist pig to work in the community. I read somewhere that the death penalty is just a scare tactic to get her to give up some cash she’s got hidden.
I mean, Vietnam is a Socialist Oriented Market Economy.
86% of Vietnamese people own their own homes, 70% are farmers because the government will allocate farm land to anyone who proves they can raise crops.
Pretty impressive stats you got there, considering that 27.2% of Vietnamese people are under 18 years old.
Such a young age to own a home!
Damn, and I can’t even get one at 30.
And remember kids, 73% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
Gotta serve those numbers with some sauce
Fairly easy to find looks like home ownership rose to 88.1%
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
The 70% farming statistics is quite wide spread;
https://www.google.com/search?q=70%25+of+veitname+are+farmers&oe=utf-8
I appreciate that you came back with it, but the point is more that you should include sources in the first place. Don’t expect other people who read your comment to go looking for information to back up your statistics, and don’t expect them to accept it just because you said it.
Also, I’ll point out that this:
About 70 per cent of Vietnamese people live in rural areas and have livelihoods dependent on agriculture.
Doesn’t necessarily mean that all 70% are farmers. For instance if I manufacture farming tools, or sell grain silos or fertilizer or w/e, my livelihood is dependent on agriculture too.
Fuck off wanker it’s a memes page and I’m allowed to mention relatively benign and unemportant stats in passing off the top of my head if I want to.
You don’t get to dictate whether I choose to use my ancient phone that takes lots of time to look stuff up because it’s a decade old to look stuff up and include links you fat and lazy western prick.
You want to go fact check for yourself it’s a relatively easy thing you could easily do, but you don’t get to police or moralize what I do with my down time you fucking internet cop blow hard wanker.
You want to so some serious fact checking of politics why don’t you go do it where it counts for the left: on mainstream rightwing sites like reddit.
Go to the Jordan Peterson sub on reddit and do it (there’s a fucking openly Nazi thread for you to check out there), go to the PCMmemes subreddit go to the TIKHistory page, and go demand sources of actual right wing Nazis, don’t try to tell me a how to spend my down time as a lefty trying to enjoy some memes because you like the thought of yourself in a blue uniform with big black boots.
I actually do those things whilst you spend your days safely moralizing to a political leftist randomly mentioning harmless facts about a Social Democracy then pretending like you’re fucking doing good or was part of some important debate on a difficult topic.
You and people who make such complaints internally in spaces like this should go out an be able to research and get the stats yourself… And you should go fact check and play internet cop where it counts and is actually difficult in the right wing spaces online where we actually need help moralizing to the literal Nazis building up there (https://www.reddit.com/r/JordanPeterson/comments/1c7cxe4/why_do_journalistic_and_academic_publications/)
Oh no, Vietnam has a slightly different stat that is expressed differently on different websites, you only know that because I told you (https://lemmy.world/comment/9497762), you lazy shit pompous internet cop wanna be wanker. Sitting and complaining in your safe space because you’re too lazy to do the basics for yourself.
You’re out of your element donnie and it’s a benign fact. What do you think someone’s going to go accidentally set up a south east asian Socialist Oriented Market Economy and find out you’d need some other policy to get a 70% farming rate.
That’s what you’re policing in a world and time period where there’s actually rightwing places and subreddits you could be using your “shoulding” internet cop powers on. Geezuz, oh no, you almost had to think for yourself for a second there. Big deal.
A benign stat, mentioned in a leftwing reddit alternative, quick call billy club jones there’s someone to should to death with demands they include links for you, you absolutely lazy baby playing cop in your safe space.
you absolutely lazy baby
I’m not the one having a temper tantrum right now.
Go fact check the right where the actual misinformation is, rather than acting all smug and superior in a way that’s completely undeserved.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Is that 70% of total or 70% of the homeowners?
70% of the rural population apparently:
https://www.google.com/search?q=70%25+of+veitname+are+farmers&oe=utf-8
That’s actually pretty awesome IMO.
Cue ‘that guy’ telling me how bad Vietnam is.
Vietnam is actually really good, as far as middle-income countries without functional democracy go.
But a high proportion of the workforce engaged in agriculture is not a good thing. Though I don’t think that 70% number is correct regardless. I think it’s considerably lower (which is better for Vietnam).
Everyone should at least have a garden of their own and the path to that is in home ownership being available to everyone.
Wake me up when Trump sees even just a shred of accountability, or Musk, or Bezos, or …
Also how does it get to 12.5 billion before people do something? Had they intervened with something less severe at 1 billion then there would still be 11.5 billion and a life not lost.
This is a communist country and a show trial for someone fell out of favor, not am actual fraud case
She stole 12.5 billion dollars?!
Jesus Christ. How much is enough?
Removed by mod
What will the method of execution be? A guillotine seems fitting.
trip to a coal mine would also be classic.
Anything that works, really.
I have neither the emotional nor mental bandwidth to read up on this, too stressed being poor. Does anything say what is happening to the money?
it doesn’t have the money anymore, and that’s why its being given justice.
thank you Vietnam, score one for the tankies. I mean, it took a while, and they still have billionaires, but its not nothing, so good on em if they follow through.
That’s typical communist competitor purges, it has nothing to o with redistribution of wealth.
This is the correct answer. It’s not the kind of revolution people are thinking, like with France.
This is more like Stalin level shit to send a message.
