Comment on What is the moral jurisdiction behind not wishing who're rich and in executive positions to die?
danciestlobster@lemmy.zip 23 hours agoI get what you are saying and it is a slippery slope, but it is very doable to draw clear, objective lines around it. “Anyone with so much money there is absolutely no way they got it without heavy worker exploitation, ie 10bn+” for example. Nothing even remotely close to the average working class individual or even minor wealthy individual
CameronDev@programming.dev 22 hours ago
You used so many subjective terms in that description. You can draw the line at a number, that is objective (but see tax evasion for how that works in practice), but “heavy worker exploitation” is entirely subjective.
In my mind, most failing hospitality businesses fall into “heavy worker exploitation”, but many of them are owner by people who arent billionaires.
danciestlobster@lemmy.zip 16 hours ago
That’s fair. The line is clearly harder to draw than I am making it seem. For the sake of argument, can we both agree that a line exists somewhere? Or would you putting forward that there is never a situation in which killing someone is morally justified no matter what the situation is?
And a follow up question, would you instead prefer that for certain extreme offenders, a life imprisonment sentence is used? I believe an argument could be made that, as the prison system exists in many countries now, this may be worse.
Or perhaps more broadly, for someone guilty of rampant repeated murder with no demonstrated indications of potential remorse or reform, what would be the ideal punishment or societal repercussion?
CameronDev@programming.dev 8 hours ago
To address the edit, I think part of the US’s problem is that you are already on the slope, and have been for a while. Violence has been normalised and accepted (and legalised as you’ve pointed out). I’d like to beleive you can reverse course, but it certainly doesnt seem likely.
I dont have any answers for you or op, but if it were me, I would focus on the defence and protection of my family/community first, rather than searching for retribution. I know that sounds hollow and empty though.
CameronDev@programming.dev 14 hours ago
I can definitely place people above the line so to speak, but I dont think I could draw an objective one-size-fits-all line.
Humanity is a continuous spectrum from people living in extreme poverty up to the one percent, and its very hard to find any clean delinineation that I would be comfortable drawing the line through.
And the other problem is that the definition of that line would vary wildly from person to person.
If I’m honest with myself, I live in a well off first world country, that in of itself means that I am indirectly responsible for a non-zero amount human suffering in other parts of the world. It doesnt necessarily make me black and white evil, but to someone in one of those parts of the world, they definitely might see it that way.
I’m happy with death as a penalty for certain acts of evil, but I would want it to be the exception, not the rule. Everytime someone is death-row’d, we should all be unanimously sure that its the right thing to do.