I've heard that when it comes to killing, there's basically three kinds of people. Some can never get over it and it haunts them for the rest of their life, some find it horrible but can deal with it somehow by rationalizing it ("it was either them or me") and some just go "oh, it's that easy?" I don't have numbers on how these three groups break down, or how much that differs from society to society, but i've also heard that the US Army, who are sadly a bit of an authority on murdering people, found that only 4% of recruits are capable of killing without remorse. Untrained people, that is. It's part of the training of frontline soldiers (and, in the US, also of normal beat cops) to bring that number up through desensitization, conditioning and an institutional culture that normalizes violence. And honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if those 4% who are supposedly "natural born killers" simply went through some kind of desensitization process before joining the army. I have a strong suspicion that social animals, including the human animal, just aren't born as killers, but need to learn how to kill. Even in predatory pack hunters like wolfs or orcas, we can observe that while they have very strong instincts to play-fight, to chase prey etc., the act of killing is something they have to be taught by their elders.
Very interesting! I think your theory follows very well, i've often wondered if arch-capitalists lack that empathy that allows them to be so cruel to others, I definetely think they have a resentment to the mass shared social experiences the lower classes can take part in and that's part of their constant need to destroy it
I've been able to observe some members of the bourgeoisie closely for years - definitely not enough people to have a good sample size, but those that i've come across have to go to very great lengths to convince themselves they aren't heartless ghouls. They fully buy into being "job creators" and a good boss and deserving of their wealth. These are people who intuitively play along with the class antagonism, who are perfectly capable of exploiting their workers and putting themselves above others - if it was otherwise, they couldn't be in their position in a competitive system, they'd just get pushed out of the market. Yet they manage to split that part of themselves off completely and think of themselves as honest, empathetic and caring human beings.
They're just like us - with one big difference. Well, two actually. The main difference is that generational wealth has put them in a starting position that enabled them to operate as members of the bourgeoise class, the second is that they have, from an early age, internalized behavorial routines and managerial skills that allow them to play the cruel game of capitalism from that very position. Growing up wealthy, they have gained an intuitive understanding of exercising authority, thinking economically, being callous whenever it's needed. But they do not see either of that, because then they couldn't function like this.
This is one of the reasons why it's so important to make the argument against capitalism not from a moral, but from a systemic point of view. Capitalism isn't as monstrous as it is because there's greedy, evil people who just love to exploit others while sitting atop a pile of gold. Capitalism is as monstrous as it is because it enacts market pressures on people that will always turn some into opressors, while punishing all those that do not go down that path.
This makes a lot of sense, thank you for the perspective! I'm definitely guilty of just assuming they're evil sometimes but they as much as we are are a product of the material conditions and a system that seeks to replicate itself
I've heard that when it comes to killing, there's basically three kinds of people. Some can never get over it and it haunts them for the rest of their life, some find it horrible but can deal with it somehow by rationalizing it ("it was either them or me") and some just go "oh, it's that easy?" I don't have numbers on how these three groups break down, or how much that differs from society to society, but i've also heard that the US Army, who are sadly a bit of an authority on murdering people, found that only 4% of recruits are capable of killing without remorse. Untrained people, that is. It's part of the training of frontline soldiers (and, in the US, also of normal beat cops) to bring that number up through desensitization, conditioning and an institutional culture that normalizes violence. And honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if those 4% who are supposedly "natural born killers" simply went through some kind of desensitization process before joining the army. I have a strong suspicion that social animals, including the human animal, just aren't born as killers, but need to learn how to kill. Even in predatory pack hunters like wolfs or orcas, we can observe that while they have very strong instincts to play-fight, to chase prey etc., the act of killing is something they have to be taught by their elders.
Very interesting! I think your theory follows very well, i've often wondered if arch-capitalists lack that empathy that allows them to be so cruel to others, I definetely think they have a resentment to the mass shared social experiences the lower classes can take part in and that's part of their constant need to destroy it
I've been able to observe some members of the bourgeoisie closely for years - definitely not enough people to have a good sample size, but those that i've come across have to go to very great lengths to convince themselves they aren't heartless ghouls. They fully buy into being "job creators" and a good boss and deserving of their wealth. These are people who intuitively play along with the class antagonism, who are perfectly capable of exploiting their workers and putting themselves above others - if it was otherwise, they couldn't be in their position in a competitive system, they'd just get pushed out of the market. Yet they manage to split that part of themselves off completely and think of themselves as honest, empathetic and caring human beings.
They're just like us - with one big difference. Well, two actually. The main difference is that generational wealth has put them in a starting position that enabled them to operate as members of the bourgeoise class, the second is that they have, from an early age, internalized behavorial routines and managerial skills that allow them to play the cruel game of capitalism from that very position. Growing up wealthy, they have gained an intuitive understanding of exercising authority, thinking economically, being callous whenever it's needed. But they do not see either of that, because then they couldn't function like this.
This is one of the reasons why it's so important to make the argument against capitalism not from a moral, but from a systemic point of view. Capitalism isn't as monstrous as it is because there's greedy, evil people who just love to exploit others while sitting atop a pile of gold. Capitalism is as monstrous as it is because it enacts market pressures on people that will always turn some into opressors, while punishing all those that do not go down that path.
This makes a lot of sense, thank you for the perspective! I'm definitely guilty of just assuming they're evil sometimes but they as much as we are are a product of the material conditions and a system that seeks to replicate itself