Comments on: How much are we all to blame for the situation in the 3rd world? http://dbzer0.com/blog/how-much-are-we-all-to-blame-for-the-situation-in-the-3rd-world A bug in the code of the universe. Thu, 24 May 2012 02:11:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: JackH http://dbzer0.com/blog/how-much-are-we-all-to-blame-for-the-situation-in-the-3rd-world/comment-page-1#comment-13807 JackH Fri, 20 Feb 2009 20:16:21 +0000 http://dbzer0.com/?p=1915#comment-13807 it was this one. i got lost...somehow. it's amazing the convoluted logical hoops people will jump through simply just to justify their behaviour (or lack thereof) isn't it? i think i'd honestly prefer it if they just said "yup, hands up, i'm just nasty and i do not care" but people seem to hate admitting that. and i don't think anyone is in any doubt about various collusionary actions on the part of various africans. white boys just ain't got the genes for the african interior (too many mozzies). the point is we made the profit, we have since used that profit to hold the third world down (and yes even all that lovely tax money given in aid has largely just exacerbated the situation). all we've done is internationalise the problem, so none of us have to actually step on the poor people as we walk our streets (if you're lucky enough to live in socialist europe anyway). out of sight, out of mind... human created situations are never beyond human control (ny the very definition of them). this is a fact is anyone seriously saying that the worlds combined GDP isn't enough to pay for universal healthcare/housing/welfare? look up the numbers, collectively we make a lot of money. if there are people in this world who are hungry, tired or, fuck it, even just a touch uncomfortable the alleviation of their woes is quite comfortably in our power to grant (and no, no one should have to work for it). question is whether or not we can be bothered... it was this one. i got lost…somehow.

it's amazing the convoluted logical hoops people will jump through simply just to justify their behaviour (or lack thereof) isn't it? i think i'd honestly prefer it if they just said "yup, hands up, i'm just nasty and i do not care" but people seem to hate admitting that.

and i don't think anyone is in any doubt about various collusionary actions on the part of various africans. white boys just ain't got the genes for the african interior (too many mozzies). the point is we made the profit, we have since used that profit to hold the third world down (and yes even all that lovely tax money given in aid has largely just exacerbated the situation). all we've done is internationalise the problem, so none of us have to actually step on the poor people as we walk our streets (if you're lucky enough to live in socialist europe anyway). out of sight, out of mind…

human created situations are never beyond human control (ny the very definition of them). this is a fact is anyone seriously saying that the worlds combined GDP isn't enough to pay for universal healthcare/housing/welfare? look up the numbers, collectively we make a lot of money. if there are people in this world who are hungry, tired or, fuck it, even just a touch uncomfortable the alleviation of their woes is quite comfortably in our power to grant (and no, no one should have to work for it).

question is whether or not we can be bothered…

]]> By: db0 http://dbzer0.com/blog/how-much-are-we-all-to-blame-for-the-situation-in-the-3rd-world/comment-page-1#comment-8612 db0 Thu, 11 Dec 2008 10:07:18 +0000 http://dbzer0.com/?p=1915#comment-8612 There's nothing mystical about it. Capitalism slowly increases the living standard of the exploited and eventually when the living is too high to be cost-worthy, looks for other people who have a lower-standard still. This is how Capitalism displaces crises geographically. If there is no more people to find, it goes into crisis unless it can displace it in time through debt. There's nothing mystical about it. Capitalism slowly increases the living standard of the exploited and eventually when the living is too high to be cost-worthy, looks for other people who have a lower-standard still. This is how Capitalism displaces crises geographically.

If there is no more people to find, it goes into crisis unless it can displace it in time through debt.

]]> By: db0 http://dbzer0.com/blog/how-much-are-we-all-to-blame-for-the-situation-in-the-3rd-world/comment-page-1#comment-8611 db0 Thu, 11 Dec 2008 10:05:22 +0000 http://dbzer0.com/?p=1915#comment-8611 Which they received through imperialism. It all started with the British empire if you remember. Which they received through imperialism. It all started with the British empire if you remember.

]]> By: db0 http://dbzer0.com/blog/how-much-are-we-all-to-blame-for-the-situation-in-the-3rd-world/comment-page-1#comment-8610 db0 Thu, 11 Dec 2008 10:04:28 +0000 http://dbzer0.com/?p=1915#comment-8610 Your definition does not exclude people selling themselves into servitude. Your definition does not exclude people selling themselves into servitude.

]]> By: db0 http://dbzer0.com/blog/how-much-are-we-all-to-blame-for-the-situation-in-the-3rd-world/comment-page-1#comment-8609 db0 Thu, 11 Dec 2008 10:02:39 +0000 http://dbzer0.com/?p=1915#comment-8609 <blockquote>We are both better off if the person in question accepts my offer. By definition that cannot be exploration. </blockquote> No you are not. The worker is right back where he started at the end of the day, while you have grown richer without working. Very similar to slavery if you ask me. The only difference is that instead of bying for him his food and clothes, you give him the money to buy his food and clothes. If you do not give the full surplus value the worker creates, you are exploiting him. Thus you are morally condemnable and the workers have the moral right to change how the system works and lay claim to the means of production

We are both better off if the person in question accepts my offer. By definition that cannot be exploration.

No you are not. The worker is right back where he started at the end of the day, while you have grown richer without working.
Very similar to slavery if you ask me. The only difference is that instead of bying for him his food and clothes, you give him the money to buy his food and clothes.

If you do not give the full surplus value the worker creates, you are exploiting him. Thus you are morally condemnable and the workers have the moral right to change how the system works and lay claim to the means of production

]]> By: db0 http://dbzer0.com/blog/how-much-are-we-all-to-blame-for-the-situation-in-the-3rd-world/comment-page-1#comment-8606 db0 Thu, 11 Dec 2008 09:59:23 +0000 http://dbzer0.com/?p=1915#comment-8606 No, you can't run a factory by yourself. You need workers. Either that, or you expect someone to do all the work for you while paying him less than he makes, simply because you happened to be there first. This is again exploitation. No, you can't run a factory by yourself. You need workers.
Either that, or you expect someone to do all the work for you while paying him less than he makes, simply because you happened to be there first. This is again exploitation.

]]> By: Andew P http://dbzer0.com/blog/how-much-are-we-all-to-blame-for-the-situation-in-the-3rd-world/comment-page-1#comment-8558 Andew P Thu, 11 Dec 2008 02:44:56 +0000 http://dbzer0.com/?p=1915#comment-8558 It wouldn't go to waste - I'd just have to run the machines myself, and instead of us both having a job and me being free to invest and create new wealth and employment, now I'm being less productive than I'd otherwise be, and the homeless guy starves to death. It wouldn't go to waste – I'd just have to run the machines myself, and instead of us both having a job and me being free to invest and create new wealth and employment, now I'm being less productive than I'd otherwise be, and the homeless guy starves to death.

]]> By: Andrew P http://dbzer0.com/blog/how-much-are-we-all-to-blame-for-the-situation-in-the-3rd-world/comment-page-1#comment-8556 Andrew P Thu, 11 Dec 2008 02:42:56 +0000 http://dbzer0.com/?p=1915#comment-8556 And also, Canada and the United States were both colonies of the British empire - and somehow they became big-time nations despite being "oppressed" by Britain. And also, Canada and the United States were both colonies of the British empire – and somehow they became big-time nations despite being "oppressed" by Britain.

]]> By: Prometheus http://dbzer0.com/blog/how-much-are-we-all-to-blame-for-the-situation-in-the-3rd-world/comment-page-1#comment-8545 Prometheus Thu, 11 Dec 2008 01:43:25 +0000 http://dbzer0.com/?p=1915#comment-8545 Let's dispense with this strawman right now. I'm not offering slavery. I'm offering work for pay. We are both better off if the person in question accepts my offer. By definition that cannot be exploration. Why do I owe them the surplus value? Did I agree to? How did I take on this obligation without agreeing to it? Let's dispense with this strawman right now. I'm not offering slavery. I'm offering work for pay.

We are both better off if the person in question accepts my offer. By definition that cannot be exploration.

Why do I owe them the surplus value? Did I agree to? How did I take on this obligation without agreeing to it?

]]> By: Alice http://dbzer0.com/blog/how-much-are-we-all-to-blame-for-the-situation-in-the-3rd-world/comment-page-1#comment-8543 Alice Thu, 11 Dec 2008 01:39:13 +0000 http://dbzer0.com/?p=1915#comment-8543 You have the cause and effect of imperialism and industrialization exactly backwards. The industrialized nations were only able to subjugate far corners of the world because they <i>already</i> had the advantage of technology and accumulated capital. You have the cause and effect of imperialism and industrialization exactly backwards. The industrialized nations were only able to subjugate far corners of the world because they already had the advantage of technology and accumulated capital.

]]>