this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2023
1698 points (98.5% liked)

World News

39402 readers
2360 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Spaniard@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Look at previous violent revolutions and see who died and who lived. I wouldn't bet on the ultra-rich, there are simple more of the rest but a new elite will rule, just like the old one.

[–] csolisr@communities.azkware.net 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

There is one massive difference between former violent revolutions and the current ones - the ultra-rich of last century still had to rely on appeasing the military to do their bidding, but the ultra-rich of today now have access to automated weapons of mass destruction at the reach of their fingertips. If they feel like it, they can nuke the planet as a last-resort measure, while they're sipping their champagne in a self-sustainable complex in the middle of nowhere.

[–] DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 1 year ago

they’re sipping their champagne in a self-sustainable complex in the middle of nowhere

well yeah, if a self-sustainable complex was even remotely achievable.

[–] dimlo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

As if they can produce champagne and other stuff out of nowhere. They may have a nuclear fallout bunker somewhere hidden in a desert but they can only rely on existing food / materials they can accumulate now. Most likely cans of food. Their champagne bottle will run dry unless they’re hiding in a massive Amazon underground warehouse that no one can access it. After all we have seen the riots in Paris, riots in Hongkong, if the law enforcement is not strong enough, people will automatically go riot mode, and if there is really a large conflict, there will be no one protecting the wealthy ones property and everyone is going for themselves

[–] jarfil@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

access to automated weapons of mass destruction at the reach of their fingertips

They don't. WMDs are far from automated, they require multiple human steps to get deployed, and each one of those can say "no" at any time (then possibly get court martialed, but the WMD stays undeployed).

What's more threatening, is having those ultra-rich promise everyone in the chain of command (and their families) a place at their self-sustainable complex.