This idea that 'self-care' and self-improvement is Capitalist propaganda is not a view I agree with but: If so, when _do/will_ leftists begin to take responsibility of themselves, what external environment is needed for them to accept some (most) self-faults are their own?
So once all one's 'basic' needs are catered for, _then_ they would finally begin to accept many faults may be their own. Problem here is, that definition of basic keeps on moving...
-
-
I don't think it necessarily has to, I'd simply define basic, in this sense, in similar terms to the manifesto, housing, education, food, water I'd also call for direct access to the means of production but it's hard to see how feasible that would be.
-
If this were true, there would be no stories of people pulling themself out of poverty. The basics are readily available.
-
To who? In my city which is in what could ostensibly be called a first world country there's a homeless population of 170,000 people
-
I don’t want to play with anecdotal data, but do you know the context of all their lives? Mix of personal failings and bad luck? You have to self-improve which includes anti-fragility towards homelessness. Capitalism as a whole has been dragging people out of poverty.
-
Those are statistics provided by shelter https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/davehillblog/2016/dec/01/londons-homelessness-count-continues-to-rise … additionally 19,000 properties in the capital remain empty
-
I could go on to talk about over half a million people having to rely on food banks but all I'll say is dismissing this as a product of personal failings is short sighted to say the least.
-
I would argue making blanket statements like you are is short sighted. The result of the economic system is derived from millions of individual choices.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.