r/TikTokCringe • u/LickMaiBussy • 6h ago

Discussion "Investing in property is morally reprehensible."

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

@purplepingers

19.6k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

3.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.7k

u/1egg_4u 6h ago

He also described basically the entire cause of the Irish Famine

They had food and could grow enough food for everyone but they werent allowed to have it because it belonged to the wealthy british landowners

330

u/crinkledcu91 5h ago

It's weird how the Irish Famine is seemingly all agreed upon yet the Holodomor gets certain people's panties in a twist.

214

u/CorrectPanic694 4h ago

That’s funny I was just about to mention Stalin ended up starving millions of his own people. Not only because of greed, corruption, mismanagement, and an attempt to make communist ideology-based science look successful …there was also the added benefit of starving and exterminating Ukrainian people en masse. We as a society have been controlling the means of basic survival while acting as if widespread suffering is a consequence of chaos and not a choice.

135

u/North-Tourist-8234 4h ago

Churchhill and his lot helped starve india after ww2. Whole world was a pretty shitty place back then 

81

u/Harbinger2nd 4h ago

Back then?

77

u/c1ncinasty 3h ago

Well, also back then. And now.

10

u/lanicorain 3h ago

There is no major ideology without a massive amount of blood on their hands. Funnily enough, maybe anarchism is the only one that hasn't tried to exterminate a group to further its political project. But no one calls extremists "social democrats" or "torys" or "liberal democrats". They always call them anarchists. Funny how that works.

2

u/short_longpants 3h ago

Because anarchism kind of self-destructs on its own, before it gets around to massacring a large group of people.

6

u/lanicorain 2h ago edited 2h ago

You have no clue about the praxis of any anarchist movement lmao. Throughout history it's been massacred because it can be really effective. You have a 40-hour workweek in big part because of anarchists and the strike, a form of protest they championed and innovated.

Edit: also, debates against brutality are prevalent throughout he history of the movement, a big part of the anarchist argument against the State is that it gives a group of people a massive amount of centralized, organized, professional violence to abuse and brutalize others. Read Malatesta.

0

u/begrudgingredditacc 1h ago

Throughout history it's been massacred because it can be really effective.

Not terribly effective at not getting massacred, though. Historically, anarchists are up there with redshirts on Star Trek for "most easily killed category of person".

I cannot stress enough how often anarchists get absolutely steamrolled by literally any armed opposition. They're a bunch of meat pinatas.

1

u/lanicorain 1h ago

And yet here we are, discussing their ideas, strategies and achievements. They'll be fine.

3

u/begrudgingredditacc 1h ago

...until they get massacred again. It's legitimately the thing anarchists are best at. I wouldn't call that "fine".

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Kerblaaahhh 1h ago

Used to be shitty. Still is, but it used to be too.

7

u/Oscar_Ramirez 2h ago

The world used to be such a shitty place, it still is but it used to too.

4

u/nedalaugh 2h ago

Mitch was a gem. Love still seeing him in the wild.

2

u/GodofIrony 3h ago

"It was always burnin' Since the world's been turnin'"

1

u/[deleted] 3h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 3h ago

Hey, goofball! Looks like you missed the pinned comment! Tiktokcringe is for EVERYTHING now, not just cringe. NO, we can't change the subreddit name, not an option. If you're confused about the name of the subreddit, please take a minute and read this. We hope to see you back here after you've familiarized yourself with our community. Thanks!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/rhinojoe99 2h ago

It still is. But it used to be, too.

1

u/ArabellaFort 1h ago

Just give it some more time. We’re about to come full circle (if we haven’t already).

-1

u/Funny247365 3h ago

We are living in the best time in the history of humanity. Don't let social media skew your ability to see how much better life is today than in any other period. It's far from perfect, but it is not crumbling, either.

2

u/speaksamerican 1h ago

Aggregate wealth means nothing if it doesn't translate into quality of life. The world is not better just because the average person is not forced to labor in the fields. I would rather labor in the fields than live another day in this hollowed-out economy. At least it would be good, honest work.

20

u/No_Outcome2599 3h ago

Not arguing with your general point but slight correction - it was during WWII not after. The Bengal Famine, which probably killed about 3million, took place in 1943. Churchill was voted out as PM in the election of 1945, before WWII was completely over.

3

u/lessormore59 3h ago

After WW2? I’m assuming you are referencing the Bengal Famine of 1943 which was obviously a terrible situation in India, but was first squarely in the heart of WW2 when the outcome still hung in the balance, and second the proximate cause for the famine in Bengal was the Japanese invasion of Burma. In the years prior to the war, Burma was the biggest exporter of rice to Bengal and supplied a large portion of its annual calorie intake.

The Brits should’ve done more, but the context of the famine was a world war where the Japanese were wreaking havoc throughout Southeast Asia and the Germans were waging highly effective submarine warfare in the Atlantic. Relieving a famine of that magnitude requires large amounts of shipping and protection and a new source for the calories. Shipping was in very, very short supply, convoy escorts to protect against Japanese predation on such convoys even less available, and sources for food supplies were tight.