Public
- Public
- Network
- Groups
- Featured
- Popular
- People

Conversation

Notices

Embed this notice
Church of Jeff (jeffowski@mastodon.world)'s status on Thursday, 06-Feb-2025 09:04:08 JST Church of Jeff

#NoBillionaires #TaxTheRich #EatTheRich #GuillotinesWork
In conversation about a month ago from mastodon.world permalink
Attachments
1. I think, every year, the richest person in the world should be sacrificed and their wealth distributed to the poorest among us. The rest of the year would be billionaires scrambling to distribute their wealth in an attempt to ensure they aren't the one to pushed out into the ocean next year. Is that radical enough for you?
  https://s3.eu-central-2.wasabisys.com/mastodonworld/media_attachments/files/113/954/002/429/478/836/original/ee06f3e61c0b4c35.png
- Embed this notice
  Church of Jeff (jeffowski@mastodon.world)'s status on Friday, 07-Feb-2025 09:57:26 JST Church of Jeff
  in reply to
  - Stefan Fendt🌻🟩
  @stefanfendt -- Then you don't understand how dire the situation is worldwide.
  Please take a look at Peter Singer and his philosophy.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine,_Affluence,_and_Morality
  In conversation about a month ago permalink
  Attachments
  1. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: upload.wikimedia.org
    
    Famine, Affluence, and Morality
    
    "Famine, Affluence, and Morality" is an essay written by Peter Singer in 1971 and published in Philosophy & Public Affairs in 1972. It argues that affluent persons are morally obligated to donate far more resources to humanitarian causes than is considered normal in Western cultures. The essay was inspired by the starvation of Bangladesh Liberation War refugees, and uses their situation as an example, although Singer's argument is general in scope and not limited to the example of Bangladesh. The essay is anthologized widely as an example of Western ethical thinking. Summary One of the core arguments of this essay is that, if one can use one's wealth to reduce suffering—for example, by aiding famine-relief efforts—without any significant reduction in the well-being of oneself or others, it is immoral not to do so. Singer introduces the "drowning child" argument or drowning child analogy. According to Singer, inaction is clearly immoral if a child is drowning in a shallow pond and someone can save it but chooses not to; nor does placing greater geographical distance between the person...
- Embed this notice
  Stefan Fendt🌻🟩 (stefanfendt@mastodon.social)'s status on Friday, 07-Feb-2025 09:57:27 JST Stefan Fendt🌻🟩
  in reply to
  
  @jeffowski
  I'm sorry. But this — even the thought of it — is by far top of the notch extremism and by far off any humanity for my taste. #taxtherich? Ok! No problem! Everything beyond would transform us into beasts. Sorry. No.
  
  In conversation about a month ago permalink

Public

Conversation

Notices

Feeds