Just curious but are we heading towards an "eat the rich" society?

As John F Kennedy said "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable"

Either we fix this peacefully through the democratic process, or people are gonna riot.

Feels too good to be true. It's only one shooting.

Now if some second evil CEO were unfortunately victimized, I might be tempted to call it a trend...

“If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.”

It's certainly part of the catabolic stage in the system's decay. Due to many reasons, both at the input side and the "drowning in waste" side (example: GHGs waste causing climate destabilization), growth is going to falter which means that the "sharing" strategy of the rich, of the oligarchs, is going to stop working. You may know it as "grow the pie" (instead of "share the pie"). The rich get richer, the rest get poorer, and there are going to be a lot of poor people. That means a lot of desperate people and a lot of people with nothing left to lose.

What you have to watch out for is perhaps two strategies that can stop this:

1. Scapegoating: vulnerable minorities and more. The rich of a certain ethnicity may become the scapegoats, instead of .... you know, ALL of that class. This would be a misdirection of attention.
2. Jingoism, chauvinism and various forms of ultra-nationalism. This would be a misdirection of violence... instead of "punching up", it becomes "punching the foreign threat", which means war.
3. Combined 1 & 2. It's usually called fascism.

Something to print:

On a related note, I really liked the recent season of "Arcane" (both seasons are great). https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11126994/

The rich have exceptional resources to protect themselves. Money is just another form of power.

For instance, even in a doomsday scenario (for them) of the French Revolution, the rich will have personal security guards. These people will be paid very well (relative to the general population), which will keep them loyal enough. They will eat at secure restaurants (similar deal), and enjoy activities in secure locations.

Beyond that, you already see the rich buying private islands (Larry Ellison) and preparing for an uprising (Peter Thiel).

But if you let your imagination run wild, they can even distort the blame, and set up patsies. Owning the media and controlling the narrative (propaganda) is highly effective and already happening in earnest. Plenty of blame is being shifted to immigrants and (because it works, somehow) LGBT+ groups.

I would even say the UHC CEO is himself a fall guy. The buck doesn't stop at the CEO. There is a step above him. The board of directors is responsible, and they will replace him with another just like him. They are the ones that ultimately choose the direction.

Permanently Deleted

One can hope.

I am surprised people have been tolerating the fuckening so well so far.

We live in a richest country and majority life is shit.

Fake news endlessly tells us to just accept it.

A dead CEO is a good message, it is provocative and it got people going.

School shooting copy cats were many... One can only pray that mentally unstable people can find a better targets going forward since shootings ain't stopping.

Might as well be these parasites.

Just curious but are we heading towards an "eat the rich" society?

I guess we should be, but that's just my personal opinion.

Realistically, no. The people have clearly expressed how dumb they are and what they desire in the November election. They want dumb Republicans, they get asshole CEOs. I don't see it any other way.

Honestly, I believe voting is the best way to bring change about a society that wants to change. It's just that I have given up the thought that the US wants to change in the direction that I would go. So no, it's not gonna happen.

Look to history for some answers.

The Denver Post had a opinion piece that talked about how America has seen something like this before.

The Gilded Age, the tumultuous period between roughly 1870 and 1900, was also a time of rapid technological change, of mass immigration, of spectacular wealth and enormous inequality. The era got its name from a Mark Twain novel: gilded, rather than golden, to signify a thin, shiny surface layer. Below it lay the corruption and greed that engulfed the country after the Civil War.

The era survives in the public imagination through still resonant names, including J.P. Morgan, John Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie and Cornelius Vanderbilt; through their mansions, which now greet awestruck tourists; and through TV shows with extravagant interiors and lavish gowns. Less well remembered is the brutality that underlay that wealth — the tens of thousands of workers, by some calculations, who lost their lives to industrial accidents, or the bloody repercussions they met when they tried to organize for better working conditions.

Also less well remembered is the intensity of political violence that erupted. The vast inequities of the era fueled political movements that targeted corporate titans, politicians, judges and others for violence. In 1892, an anarchist tried to assassinate industrialist Henry Clay Frick after a drawn-out conflict between Pinkerton security guards and workers. In 1901, an anarchist sympathizer assassinated President William McKinley. And so on.

As historian Jon Grinspan wrote about the years between 1865 and 1915, “the nation experienced one impeachment, two presidential elections ‘won’ by the loser of the popular vote and three presidential assassinations.” And neither political party, he added, seemed “capable of tackling the systemic issues disrupting Americans’ lives.” No, not an identical situation, but the description does resonate with how a great many people feel about the direction of the country today.

It’s not hard to see how, during the Gilded Age, armed political resistance could find many eager recruits and even more numerous sympathetic observers. And it’s not hard to imagine how the United States could enter another such cycle.

I really fucking hope so, the world has too many rich morons in charge and we genuinely need to do something about it right now if we want to have a planet anymore.

It always does. The lords get too greedy, and the peasants revolt.

The US has done an exceptionally good job of propaganizing that instinct out of people. But the material conditions of American Life have brought the sentiment roaring back.

Basically there are 2 paths. Either way is going to be a revolutionary upturning of the status quo. Either there will be another FDR who reins in the worst impulses of Capital. Or the citizenry will do it for them.

That or GovCo goes full authoritarian to control the population. But that has the potential to spark a civil war. After all, we have more guns than people to use them. A few massacres around the country would spark a real resistance.

You know the saying, "death and taxes"? Well, they stopped paying taxes.

No... Lemmy is, but Lemmy is not indicative of society at large, hell, the Internet is not indicative of society at large.

Look at the last US election, if we were going to Eat the Rich would we have elected a putative billionaire candidate backed by Elon Musk?

Hopefully

as an outsider I would think no. you don't have much political force to cultivate this sentiment. democrats are already acting shocked and devastated for their buddies. they're on the side of ceos, don't forget. insider trading party can hardly pretend to give a shit about the average person. they will wait for the flame to burn out. return to business as usual: protecting the rich, losing elections and all that.

If people can protest for higher taxes on the wealthy, and ensure that money is spent on social services that would be a great start. I don’t know about other countries, but why the fuck can’t America do a Nordic model of socialism?

No one is even trying to assassinate space karen

It will inspire copycats for sure. If the guy is never caught, then a lot of corporate management will be extremely nervous. They'll just hire extra security for themselves. There will probably be a mass shooting taking out some innocent people.

I don't think we're headed towards that society. This was one incident. We've lived with the billionaire boot on our necks for decades and decades, I think people have become complacent if anything and the vast majority of us go to tictok or places like Lemmy to vent and then never actually do anything about it. We vote, the billionaire class candidate wins, and nothing ever changes. We sigh, vent, and go back to work.

I wouldn't take this one incident to mean anything larger.

In my opinion, just like humanity is taking more from nature than is sustainable and in turn we create climate change, modern capitalism takes more from workers than thei can sustain. And just like climate change is not something that happens suddenly, but is more like a slow slide towards doom, the tone in society is steadily getting rougher, until something breaks.

I’m honestly just glad it brought the left and the right together! 🥰Give more CEOs bunnies, get more unity? Working class solidarity, ya’ll. 🥳

I hope so. We need more organization though. The biggest hurdle to "us" as the majority is that we suck at working together and looking past differences for the greater good. And they will use every tool like media, social media, TV, film, and more to keep us that way.

Nah. That won't happen until the Resource Wars begins in earnest.

Aren't we primarily ok with this guy being assassinated because he was the face of a terrible company not because he was CEO in general? If someone from middle management or even low level worker who personally denied this guy′s insurance claim would have been assasinated, would we suddenly feel sorry?

Also remember that people like surgeons or dentists also can be considered ″filthy rich″ by your average Joe standards.

I sure hope so with how difficult the rich are making it to just fucking get by in this world. Just having more wealth and power than anyone in the history of mankind isn't enough for them; they have to make sure everyone else has nothing.

Never underestimate the laziness of a disaffected but mostly not quite yet starving population.

tl;dr: Patience, grasshopper.

We're the same people we were a week ago.

Short answer: no.

One CEO getting shot is not going to change much. The American public's attention span is two weeks, if that. Another CEO in the endless line of corporate douchebags will take the spot of the murdered one and so on. All the lousy crap that led to our fucking useless health care system is still in place: CEOs with no heart/conscience, health industry lobbyists, spineless politicians for sale to the highest bidder.

For sure, this was an exceptional event, but it's not going to lead to any lasting change. Disagree with me? Post your prediction for what will change one year from now and let's see what happens. My guess is NOTHING.

If we are it's the rich's own fault, which is what that phrase actually means.

I think billionaires are entering a phase known as FAFO.

The system is extremely flawed but works just well enough for a plurality of people to feel like they are getting something out of it. I think it would need to collapse in such a way as to affect more people if there was a chance it would be replaced

Don’t eat shit, mulch the rich.

Ha, I wish.

Hopefully we will move towards a more equitable society, but Fascists also have a track record of exploiting the sort of instability American society has been faced with during this century so far. If we don't handle this carefully, it could go badly. Which is saying a lot, given the last decade.

Maybe not eat. Most of them are old and probably way to tough to chew.

nope but the middle class that is left is about to take a good fucking

I doubt it. There's a good chance that we will see copycat killers. That's a well known phenomenon, but it is not a change in society.

High-profile events can catalyze changes. Violence has been committed. A person died. That creates a sense of urgency. Americans have discovered that there is a broad consensus that something ought to be done about health care. We'll see.

But I do not see any appetite for a societal change. Americans look at individuals, not at systemic factors. The USA has, by far, the highest incarceration rate in the world. It costs the taxpayer a lot of money to feed and house all those people, not to mention that the rest of society misses out on all the productive labor they could do. The US likes to punish individuals for perceived wrong-doing, but it does not look at systemic factors.

US society now wants more bad guy CEOs punished. That's not a change and it will not lead to a change. People aren't even thinking about how the law could be changed to punish these bad guys, or what they personally could do alone or by collective action. They are waiting for heroes.

Americans want V (for Vendetta) to save them while they watch the show. Many think that Elon Musk is Ironman. That's part of the malaise.

People want individuals to take care of things and so individuals need the power to do so. Well, billionaires are people who have been given the power to take care of business (excuse the pun). And if they don't do it right, it's because they are greedy or have some other individual flaw.

🍽🍽🍽🍽🍽🍽

Probably not, but it's nice to see that the assassination of just one executive, and the widespread support and praise the assassin has received, has other parasites terrified. My optimistic side says that maybe this will get the attention of lawmakers. My realistic side foresees private militias funded by megacorporations, but without rockerboy Keanu Reeves leading the resistance against them.

I'm so hungry...

Nah, we're going to see more anon violent terrorists, some of them might even do a little good, but for the most part it's not going to change a single thing about our system of laws or how the majority of people navigate that system.

White supremacists groups have been kidnapping, holding government buildings hostage, and threatening politicians for decades and they don't get their way, don't expect it to be any different from any other groups or individuals.

There are plenty of alternatives to eat the rich.

UBI does not make the rich any poorer. It just decentralizes power so that all can survive and eliminates crime.

While our electoral politics is divided between either "pro business" or "hamas supporting communist radical left", it could seem reasonable to constrain oligarchy and Israel first rule while still being pro economic growth and prosperity. This requires an "eat the media stooges" who refuse to tell the difference along with a forceful message that the DNC doesn't support.

Understanding that DNC are worthless pig fuckers meant to fundraise and not empower ordinary people is step 1 to progress.

No.

The killing of the CEO was a one-off event.

There would need to be readily apparent will to revolt, or a slow buildup of tit-for-tat escalating action/reaction between have-not and the rich…. More killings and active attacks, more police trying to crush any protest or anyone rebelling, harsher and harsher punishment for resistance or protest, and a wealthy class protecting themselves as much as possible while telling everyone (most likely through the press and government they own) how bad it would be for everyone were they to be killed or the system disrupted.

I know this question is silly but something about this irks me

Yes pls.

Since most people would be too happy to be (very) rich themselves, I doubt that will ever happen. Or only if we were to live in a "eat the other than me rich" society? ;)

I certainly hope not, given how an “eat the rich” society generally becomes an “eat your children” society in short order.

Nah it looks like they're just throwing them back on the streets.

No

No its just one event. The first time I've seen this on Lemmy and I can't blame people for not being sad about it.

Anything else would be Stockholm syndrome.

No

You might feel happy about this in your far left wonderland. But in the real world, the consequence of stuff like this spreading will be that CEOs will acquire better security, nobody will ever be able to even glance at them without getting tasered and you the consumer are going to pay for all of it.

Changing the social security system into a centralized one might work, but note that scandinavia (the place that has championed such systems) is having pretty big problems with their health care systems as well.

Perhaps IT work has tarnished my political mind as well, but I tend to think more and more that it's not about the ideology, but about the implementation that matters.