• UmeU@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    I have always said that so long as McDonalds has a hot burger for a few bucks on every street corner, there will not be a revolution in the US.

    Rather than starving to death, we have an obesity epidemic along with an opiate epidemic, which prevents the revolution from getting up off the couch.

    Not trying to claim a conspiracy here, just the way things are.

    • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 days ago

      Yeah, the gap between the wealthiest and everyone else literally does not matter at all, when it comes to ‘motivation for revolution’.

      The overall level/amount/condition of poverty is what matters. And let’s be real, things are not nearly as bad in the US today as they were in France before the French Revolution. Not even close.

      Fact is, if you magically bumped everyone up so that no one was making less than $75k a year, the wealth gap would be essentially identical to what it is now, because the gap between zero and 75k is nothing compared to the gap between 75k and hundreds of billions. But no one would be suffering in poverty, so would anyone care about the wealth gap, then? I seriously doubt it.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 days ago

      McDonald’s is expensive now.

      A double cheeseburger was a dollar a few years ago, sure. But it’s almost that much for a single nugget these days.

      A hash brown is 3.50 at the one by my office.

      • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 days ago

        Looked it up:

        McDonald’s double cheeseburger hasn’t been a dollar for over 15 years (started in 2002, and in 2008, the McDouble replaced it, which had one fewer slice of cheese). And the McDouble itself stopped being a dollar in 2013, over a decade ago. Bit more than “a few years ago”–I think Covid screwed up everyone’s perception of time more than usual, lol.

        That said, I get lunch at work several times a week at Wendy’s and always pay less than $5, not too bad all things considered imo.

    • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 days ago

      It only takes about 3% of the population to push effective revolution. That’s still over ten million people. We might be getting close.

    • x0chi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Just offer free food and specially free opiates if they start a revolution. There’s many means to a end

  • exopp3333@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    7 days ago

    Tesla employee count: 140,473

    SpaceX employee count: 13,000

    Elon Musk could transfer $1 million in stock to each of his 153,473 employees,
    which would cost him $153 billion and he would still have a net worth of $302 billion!
    He’d still be the richest man in the world and would still have $56 billion more than Jeff Bezos!

    And some of that money he has came from under-paying factory workers at his Fremont, California assembly plant. For a long time the hourly rate was $22 (not sure what it is now) but auto plants in the Midwest were paying that or better and he was paying $22 per hour in one of the highest cost of living areas in the country.

    Elon is now worth more than Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates combined.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      And some of that money he has came from under-paying factory workers at his Fremont, California assembly plant. For a long time the hourly rate was $22 (not sure what it is now) but auto plants in the Midwest were paying that or better and he was paying $22 per hour in one of the highest cost of living areas in the country.

      All those employees were given stock options as part of their total compensation which those other auto factories did not give to everyone.

      All the early floor workers would be multi millionaires if they kept their initial stock, not counting using the employee program to buy more at a discounted rate or further employee incentives.

      Anyone who joined a little after the Model S was being sold and the early model 3 time up to around mid 2020 would have around a quarter million if they didn’t aquire any additional stock.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if Tesla as a company created the most employee millionaires of any recent USA company due to giving every employee stock as part of their compensation.

      Early SpaceX employees are in a similar boat, but it’s harder to get rid of their shares since it’s private so it’s harder to quantify it.

    • rthomas6@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 days ago

      Tbf, if he transfered that stock, the price of it would crash as the employees sold it. He’d have to do some kind of slow transfer over several years.

      • Overshoot2648@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        All businesses should be worker or consumer cooperatives. Capital shouldn’t be divorced from stakeholders like in our current capitalist system, but rather socially owned by the direct stakeholders like in Mutualism.

  • Gammelfisch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    The French people do not tolerate shit, the Americans on the hand will wallow in it and say work harder for less.

    • nomy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      It’s one of the main reasons our owner class has sought to mock the French with “surrender” slurs and “freedom fries.”

      They’d very much like the citizenry to forget Frances contribution to America and “western culture” over the last 200 years lest they get any ideas.

  • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Americans are too weak to demand what we deserve. Too complacent.

    Worker productivity has skyrocketed over the last century, but we’re still working the same 40+ hour work weeks. What’s the point of advancing technology and increasing efficiency if our lives don’t get easier/happier?

    Healthcare is dogshit and we’re all categorically getting ripped off by it.

    We used to tax rich people appropriately in this country and, surprise surprise, the middle class was way stronger back then.

    Now we’re just pussies that let the useless mega-rich do whatever the fuck they want to us and idolize them for it.

    We’re a bunch of bitches is what we are. Too feeble and uneducated to bring about real change. Even voting against our own best interests because we can’t be bothered to learn anything. We’re honestly pathetic.

  • VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    Despite the current wealth inequality a good number of people are still living decently enough.

    I’m waiting to see what happens when Trump starts putting his taxes in place. When people are miserable enough they’ll take to the streets and protest. If we reach a breaking point where living conditions completely break down and there still aren’t protests then it may as well be over for democracy.

    • buttfarts@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 days ago

      America is a frog getting slowly heated in a pot of water. The only hope is to turn up the heat fast enough and high enough that the frog jumps out of the pot before it gets cooked

    • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Yeah there is no single explanation for revolution. Looking strictly to wealth distribution is reductionistic at best. I mean, wealth distribution was arguably better in the U.S. in the 1860s than it was in the prelude to Revolutionary France and yet we had a Civil War lmfao. There are endless examples that disprove this rule. The reality is: popular unrest is extremely complicated, and the factors that lead up to it are varied with fluctuating levels of influence at different stages of development. Sure, perception of wealth is a key component… but its hardly an explainer.

    • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      Despite the current wealth inequality

      It’s not “despite” the gap, because the gap itself does not cause poverty. If the poorest person in the US made $75k/year (in other words, poverty completely eradicated), the size of the gap would still be pretty much exactly the same (after all, the difference between zero and 75k is nothing compared to the difference between 75k and hundreds of billions, which is the current net worth of those with the most wealth).

      After all, 50 years ago, the gap was significantly smaller, but the overall incidence of poverty was much higher.

      Someone’s always going to have the most. And new wealth is constantly being created. And net worth is a valuation, a price tag, not an amount of cash (which is the primary reason it can go up as fast as it can–cash money simply can’t do that). Given these facts, expect this gap to always exist (and almost certainly continue to widen), even after poverty is eradicated.

  • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    I know it’s cliche by this point. But this one misattributed1 quote has become more prescient than ever.

    They’ve learned that giving us new shiny shit every year will keep the majority of us mollified against all kinds of injustice.

    1 - Commonly credited to George Orwell’s novel. It’s actually from the stage play adaptation.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      7 days ago

      I wouldn’t glorify Orwell, he was violently reactionary, even Anarchists fighting alongside him questioned why he wasn’t on the “other side.” He had a deeply aristocratic worldview, admired Hitler, and despised the Working Class for their “stupidity.” I recommend reading On Orwell as well as A Critical Read of Animal Farm.

      • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        7 days ago

        Not glorifying Orwell. I’m aware of his history. The quote actually belongs to either Robert Icke or Duncan MacMillan; the two men who wrote the stage adaptation. Politics aside, it’s a fitting quote.

      • nomy@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        If you just give everyone unlimited bread sticks most people never even make it to the entree, and I don’t think that’s a bad thing.

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      funny how such a big anticommunist meaning to predict socialism just ended up predicting capitalism

  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    There are significant barriers in place for revolution in the US. The Proletariat is still under the belief that supporting US Imperialism will benefit themselves more than Socialism. Additionally, theory is frequently coopted by Trots and other impractical forms, resulting in people endlessly seeking to critique society, not change it (your Noam Chomskys and the like). Moreover, labor organization has been millitantly crushed.

    I recommend starting with theory. I have an introductory Marxist reading list if you want a place to start.

    For elaboration on Chomsky, I recommend reading On Chomsky.

    • eldavi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      i saw someone else try to share a similar message on tiktok yesterday and the overwhelming majority of the american users referred theory as little more than “book clubs for intellectuals” despite the chinese & latin american users trying to defend its usefulness on the same post.

      getting my feet wet with this reading list is making it clear to me that i’m still a heavily propagandized american liberal and some of the tiktokers who called it a book club had seemingly more knowledge of theory that I did, so i wasn’t qualified to speak up. what would your response be to such a criticism?

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        People who denounce theory denounce revolution. It’s plain and simple. Back in pre-revolutionary Russia, the SRs declared “an end to theory” as a unifying factor to be celebrated, and declared assassinations “transfer power.” This is, of course, ridiculous, theory is important because it is useful despite disagreements over it, and assassinations do not “transfer power,” but create a void filled by those closest to it, always bourgeois, never proletarian. The Bolsheviks ended up being correct, that theory, discipline, and organization is what brings real revolution, and the SRs have mostly been forgotten. I recommend reading Revolutionary Adventurism.

        It’s important to recognize that Westerners have an implicit desire to maintain the status quo, having been taught all our lives that we have the “best possible” system yet. The western leftist idea of “no true Marxism yet” fits conveniently with that narrative, it’s deeply chauvanistic and moreover anti-revolutionary. Looking at the most popular trends of Marxism in the west, we see many Trots and “orthodox” Marxists, some of the least successful in producing real revolution globally, while in the Global South Marxism-Leninism is dominant.

        The “book club” Marxists are equally dangerous as the “adventurist” Marxists (or Anarchists, if you prefer). It is only through uniting theory with practice that we will succeed. You cannot be anti-theory and you cannot be anti-practice, you must unite both. I want to commend your discipline in not speaking up, one of the guiding principles of Marxists is “no investigation, no right to speak.” Muddying the waters with low quality input is pollutant, asking good questions and practicing self-restraint when speaking on what you don’t know clarifies the waters of discourse.

        I highly recommend reading Masses, Elites, and Rebels: the Theory of “Brainwashing.”

      • Belly_Beanis [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 days ago

        To add on to what else has been said, you can just be blunt and obnoxious about it. Tell them “If a bunch of barely literate peasants in China can figure out Kapital on their own despite it being written in another language, you can read a pamphlet or two.”

        People smarter than anyone alive have done more in worse conditions and did us the courtesy of writing down what worked and what didn’t. The Bolsheviks, Black Panther Party, anarchists in Civil War Spain and Nazi Germany, etc. were in life or death situations trying to mobilize leftwing revolution. The least anyone calling themselves a socialist can do is read what they wrote. If you say “I don’t need to read theory because it’s just a book club,” you’re being an arrogant, egotistical asshole.

        We also live in an age where there are audiobooks and videos that will read this stuff to you for free, something our predecessors didn’t have. People with disabilities have used these tools to help them understand theory when they struggle with reading. There’s really no excuse.

  • coolusername@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    yes but have you considered that in nk they have no food and push the trains? (source: CIA) instead of all this radical talk i think we should VOTE harder, especially for progressive like bernie and aoc

  • umbrella@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    they shaped their culture around anticommunism. you bet they will keep alienating their people further, and will hold off a revolution for as long as possible.

    • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      I’m not sure I would characterize it that way. It was a bourgeois revolution, lead by the bourgeoisie, who were not starving. Same with the American Revolution. These were revolutions led by & funded by people who owned the means of production.

  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Looking at wealth distribution on a country-by-country basis is a mistake.

    Take that US wealth distribution graph and then graph it with the rest of the world; the reason there’s no revolution becomes obvious.