• 9point6@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    There’s two main reasons:

    If the thing that takes the labour away from the workers is owned privately, it will not benefit the workers.

    If we do not drastically change how the economy works, people not being able to work to exchange their labour for income means they starve and die

    • Daftydux@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I just dont believe we will ever reach consensus until a certain class of people miss a few meals.

      • 9point6@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Well even under the current framework, we just need enough people to consistently vote for left wing (i.e. not liberal and obviously not conservative) candidates, who will seek to protect workers from this situation through a variety of ways (e.g. stronger social security to eliminate the need to labour for survival, nationalisation of the companies taking the labour so the public benefits, wealth redistribution from those who have already enriched themselves on the back of others’ work)

        Failing that, history gives some examples of more extreme measures that can be employed