Just double checking...we agree that this is suboptimal, right? Since might does not in fact equal (moral) right?
I'm not arguing for any previous arguments here, just want to argue that "might makes right" is a very dangerous system.
Strawman-ing: It sounds like the argument is "might implies right because you must have done something right to get that money"
There's a lot wrong with that. You didn't earn the money often, because inheritance. And we're assuming the "right" things you did to earn that money for capitalism maps somehow to "right" things for humanity, which obviously isn't a direct 1-1.
And imagine that logic flipped: "Less might makes less right" -> "less might implies less right because you must have done something wrong to not have money". Like, say that to a 5 year old, poor descendent of slaves.
But again, I'm strawman-ing. Just wanted to get that out there.
I'm not arguing for any previous arguments here, just want to argue that "might makes right" is a very dangerous system.
Strawman-ing: It sounds like the argument is "might implies right because you must have done something right to get that money"
There's a lot wrong with that. You didn't earn the money often, because inheritance. And we're assuming the "right" things you did to earn that money for capitalism maps somehow to "right" things for humanity, which obviously isn't a direct 1-1.
And imagine that logic flipped: "Less might makes less right" -> "less might implies less right because you must have done something wrong to not have money". Like, say that to a 5 year old, poor descendent of slaves.
But again, I'm strawman-ing. Just wanted to get that out there.