• MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    3 days ago

    You know, when i originally read this, the way i interpreted it was that he was saying that if you need to earn money to live you don’t deserve to live.

    I much prefer the version that is an indictment of the phrase “earn a living” as implying you don’t deserve to live if you aren’t “working” in the modern sense of earning money at a modern job vs doing what’s necessary to stay alive like all nature’s critters.

    • LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      “If you don’t earn money, you don’t deserve to live.”

      This is how I interpreted it and it definitely feels true, that’s how capitalism treats us.

      • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        For clarification, I initially read it to mean that anybody “poor enough” to have to work to earn money does not deserve to live. I.e., rich people are human, everybody else is subhuman.

        Your interpretation I saw a few moments later, and that the post was criticizing that phrase. Basically, the polar opposite of my first impression.

        • LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Ah yes it can be interpreted multiple ways, I see your perspective 1) there are people who don’t need to work in order to earn money, they are the highest class of humans.

          1. Then there are people who have to work to earn money, they are considered pitiful but still essential cogs in our economy,

          2. then there are people who do not earn money and they are the ones who capitalism deems worthless.