Private property? Freedom of speech? Freedom to breed? Freedom of thought?..

  • WhatSay@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    45 seconds ago

    I would don the black hood and swing the ax

    Tis messy work, but it’s gotta be done

  • NastyNative@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    We dont need to give up anything we just need change. Regulations are what keeps capitalism from killing us all and this planet. We have allowed deregulation to put us in this spot and its going to get worst.

    • SaltSong@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Provided they don’t touch freedom to not breed, and we don’t put racist ducks in charge, I think that works be the easiest for me to bear.

      But I don’t want kids, so it’s not much of a sacrifice.

    • bitjunkie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      For me that would depend on whether it’s just my personal freedom to do so or all of humanity’s. I didn’t come to the hypothetical thought experiment question thread to not kill 8 billion fucking people.

  • Agent641@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 day ago

    The landlords.

    There are a lot of them so it would be exhausting work to behead them all myself but that’s a sacrifice I’m willing to make

  • RBWells@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    How much better of a world? I’d be happy with half of what I have if it meant literally everyone else in the world could have that much, certainly. Move 4 more people into the house and give up half the money, half the clothes, my car, of course I would do that if it brought the same level of wealth to every single person, it would be not great at first but wow can you imagine how fast it would get better, if nobody was terribly poor? I’d bet that by the time I was old we’d personally be better off than before the split.

  • Majestic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Private property isn’t a sacrifice. I don’t own any.

    There’s a difference between personal property and private property. Private property is a mall, is a factory, is machinery at your workplace. Personal property is your toothbrush, your Playstation, your Television, your blender, your set of German knives, your computer, your books, etc.

    Freedom of speech has never existed. The illusion of it has been allowed to be stronger or weaker in various places at various times, if your speech is no threat it’s often allowed, it’s when it’s a threat that suddenly the freedom vanishes and hides behind excuses like national security or illegal ideologies, etc.

    I question how you would get rid of freedom of thought without some sort of hellish brain implants being made mandatory so it’s an odd thing to mention.

    I’d be willing to sacrifice an awful lot of fascists, reactionaries, and an awful lot of enabling liberals. I’d be willing to sacrifice bourgeoisie. The expropriation of their private property is not a sacrifice but a necessity for things being held in common trust for the people.

    • SaltSong@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but a lot of the trouble in the US was caused by people using their freedom to do terrible things to people, and to set the stage for more of the same.

          • hperrin@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            We’re talking about a better world and giving up freedoms. Americans have given up a bunch of freedoms and have gotten a worse world because of it.

            • SaltSong@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 hours ago

              The one does not flow directly from the other. A better world requires some protecting from each other, which means giving up some freedoms. A system of complete and total freedom would not be good for most people.

              However, as Franken said, it is important not to give up essential freedoms. What freedoms, exactly, count as “essential” ones? Hard to say. We should have a thread to discuss it.

              • hperrin@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 hour ago

                Yes, the freedom to murder people would not be good for most people, but you are taking away others’ freedoms when you do that. But, this thread is about private property, speech, starting a family, and thought. Maybe I should have been more specific in my original comment. A better world wouldn’t require sacrificing these freedoms. It would require giving up the freedom to take others’ freedoms away.

                Any freedom that means you have control over your own body and thoughts, I would consider an “essential” freedom, and those are the ones that I mean when I say a better world wouldn’t require giving up those freedoms. If you’re giving up your right to control your own body, you’re inviting a worse world.

  • Nemoder@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Convenience.
    Sadly it is something far fewer people are willing to give up than any of the above.

    • actionjbone@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      It really depends on the kind of convenience.

      Some conveniences are easier to give up, especially if giving them up will benefit others.

      • a new sad me@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Example: if we are willing to walk around with smartphones that are 5mm thicker and 50g heavier, and a bit less slick in design, we can fix them instead of buying new ones. This kind of things. And we are not even willing to give that up.

        This guy speaks about this (I’m not sure if this is the right video)

        https://youtu.be/nrv45bvP8qo

        • PrivateNoob@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          I don’t know if the general population cares about phone thickness that much, but in my case I actually would hate a too thin phone.

        • lattrommi@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          Who is “we”? You got a mouse in your pocket or something? I absolutely would make that sacrifice. I hate smartphones. I didn’t own one until 2020 and only ended up with it because some scumbag salesman tricked my aging mom into buying it and adding a new number on her account under contract. So she gave it to me. I wish smartphones would go away. They are as “smart” as AI is “intelligent”. I’ve gone without a car most of my life, i’ve never had netflix/instagram/amazon/twitter/etc accounts, I didn’t have internet for the first 15 years as an adult and I am ready to give these things I have now that I don’t want, which are somehow mandatory to participate in life these days. The prospect of getting rid of it all and trying my hand at hermit life or as a hobo grow stronger every day.

  • leaky_shower_thought@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 days ago

    the ability to lie and “falsely claim”.

    imagine everybody is stricken with that boy’s wish from “liar liar”

    sure there would be a bunch of hurt feelings, but maybe the better world can compensate?