I know things are arguably better now than they ever have been before. That doesn't mean things can't be vastly better. "End of history" my ass. We've still got a long way to go. In some regards I think we've even regressed- the historian Yuval Noah Harari outlines in his book Sapiens that hunter-gatherers enjoyed many things modern humans don't: a more egalitarian structure, an abundance of leisure time, a tight-knit community with strong social ties. I'm no anarcho-primitivist, and I think technology and science have immense emancipatory potential for the human race. But for all our high-tech fancy gadgets and gizmos we sure operate under some primitive, even barbaric institutions. No civil society should have citizens struggling to meet their basic needs. No civil society should be predicated on the inherently coercive paradigm of "work or starve". What's the point of living in a society if not to harness the collective power of its citizens to uplift them all? We are squandering our potential.
deleted by creator
Except that the only reason our species has made it this far is literally because "apes together strong". We're social creatures, we evolved to be part of a tribe. And why do people act like human needs and desires would magically disappear if the capitalist mode of work was abolished? As long as humans have needs and desires, humans are going to expend effort to meet those needs/desires.
I've been meaning to read Singer. Has he never heard of historical materialism?
deleted by creator
I think he's a neolib. The effective altruism movement that he spawned is shady as hell, with major backing from billionaires like Gates, and often questionable positions. For example, many effective altruists claim that its ethical to prioritize making as much money as possible, because then you can donate more to charity.
deleted by creator
The argument that we have a moral obligation to donate to suffering people is from Singer's "Famine, Affluence, and Morality". Since then, he's written multiple books building up the tenets of effective altruism and lauding figures like Bill Gates. According to this article he argues that you should "choose a career based on what they can accomplish through philanthropy". He has repeatedly argued against Marx, rejecting his ideas on the basis of "human nature" while upholding neoliberal capitalism as the best we can do rn.
There are leftist critiques of his views on effective altruism, and I'll see if I can dig some up. Outside of his more serious stances, he churns out some real dogshit arguments sometimes, probably just to court controversy.
Dogshit: When Will the Pandemic Cure Be Worse Than the Disease?
TW: SV Dogshit
EDIT: Here's one leftist critique of the arguments underlying effective altruism Scihub link: https://sci-hub.se/10.1080/00455091.2002.10716510
deleted by creator
Animal Liberation was an incredibly formative book for me. I was evangelical about veganism for a few months afterwards.
Same, while I'm more critical of Singer now, I'll always have a soft spot for Animal Liberation.
Not sure how I feel about his other pieces on animals tho
Holy shit. Lmao. No thank you Mr. Singer. No fucking thanking you.
i've thrown back this before: wouldn't you rather work with people who want to be there with you? make them imagining "carrying" other people who are forced to work with them because they are miserable vs. working with productive, happy people that will share the load. i know this is simplifying things but i've gotten through to some actual conservatives like this.