Example: I believe that IP is a direct contradiction of nature, sacrificing the advancement of humanity and the world for selfish gain, and therefore is sinful.
Edit: pls do not downvote the comments this is a constructive discussion
Edit2: IP= intellectal property
Edit3: sort by controversal
One for the world:
I think dog / cat ownership is immoral. There are huge energy and material costs to supporting those animals.
Cats when allowed outside will decimate ecosystems and are literal invasive species. As for dogs, I can’t help but feel that they’ve have been weaponized into a deniable tool for harassing other people.
One for Lemmy:
I think capitalism can be good. I think in an ideal world where everyone’s needs are met, there will still be a market and people getting ludicrously wealthy. And I think in that ideal world those ludicrously wealthy people can translate that wealth into political power.
This seems insane for those of us trapped in this present, but I think it is good for there to be a mechanism where understanding some reality that is tied to physical phenomena gives people power.
I think large organizations can get by for a very long time inculcating in their members strange philosophies. If the only path to power is by acquiescing to your superiors and parroting dogma, I think that would be bad.
Of course, conditions in the real world look nothing like those in that ideal world.
Edited away: I think dog / cat ownership makes you a bad person.
I thought it was unnecessarily inflammatory and regret choosing that inflammatory language
Well boy howdy, do I have some good news for you about the world you currently live in.
That’s because we’re seeing the results of the hyper wealthy being able to turn their wealth into political power.
Capitalism is frankly completely incompatible with everyone’s needs being met. By definition capitalism relies on exploitation.
Do you differentiate between people who purchased their pets vs rescue, or do you see all pet owners as the same?
I think owning pets in our modern urban lives doesn’t make sense like it used to, but I have always had pets and do enjoy them. Every single one has been a rescue though. I could not personally justify supporting breeders and pets as an industry.
Honestly, I just dislike other people’s dogs. They’re off leash, aggressive, and slowly bleeding into every space. Having a neighbor that encouraged anxiety and barking was an exceedingly unpleasant experience.
That being said, I’m uncomfortable with the idea of animals being created for and existing for humans. The situation is definitely better than the livestock industry and there’s also the complication that the pets seem to be happy and humans seem to be happier with pets. It would also be exceedingly cruel to take away service dogs from those that have them.
But, pet ownership is rising world wide. Given the demand, they’ll be bred. Pet QoL is going up. Now that they’re family, their environmental impact is going to grow.
Yes, rescues are better than the alternative. Spaying and neutering reduce harm. I wish that the default pets would instead be cold-blooded terrestrial animals and rodents. I wish pets were unable survive outside of captivity.
I think it’s generally immoral to own pets and that if one does, one should strive to maximize the human happiness:externality ratio. It’s a minor immorality, but the OP asked for controversial moral opinions.
Well this one definitely qualifies as potentially unpopular. As an added bonus, it’s also wrong, but that may explain why it’s so “flat earth” un-popular.
True. No one should let a cat outside; not ever. It’s cruel to the cat and cruel to the ecosystem and never required.
I’m sorry you can’t help that. Maybe that’s something to work on?
I’m not a fan of dogs, especially as we responsibly move to density housing and save space for shared green space and agri needs. But a badly behaved dog is 20% juvenile trauma and 80% parenting.
We don’t have a test or an enforceable license to ensure people who know how to care for an animal are the only ones who get to; but if you advocated for such a thing I’d be marching there with ya.
But, do learn.
I think rescuing animals is good, but continuing to breed them is absolutely morally wrong
Are you thinking of the fake “service dog” thing?
I feel the need to point out there’s multiple definitions of it in use, even, and people slide fluidly between them.
I’m not touching the first one, but the second I agree there’s a nieve understanding where it could be good. As soon as they start using their power to prevent others from gaining power (which always happens instantly) then there’s an issue. The more money you have, the easier it becomes to make money and keep others from making money, creating a situation where they’re subservient to you because they need resources you control to survive. There’s no freedom there. The only way it can work and be good is with ruthless government oversight protecting the people and redistributing accumulated wealth.
I see Big Pet has gotten to you 😔
There’s a danger of power accumulating in any system. But there are mitigations. The greatest threat to this fantasy system are barriers to entry. If everyone has their needs met, then there can be a minimum wage of 0. With the minimum wage at 0, I think barriers to entry will drop dramatically and it’ll be that much harder to protect “your” market share.
If we get rid of “intellectual property”, barriers to entry drop even further. Switching costs can be minimized by open standards. But then we run into the harder questions of the physical barriers to entry (rent, commodities, factories) and regulatory barriers to entry.
With a reasonably low barrier of entry, I hope that there will be enough centers of power that are intrinsically opposed to one another so that they cannot combine and oppress us all.
And for any government, what’s to stop them from oppressing us instead? The people always will have some mechanisms of control but every system will have its own difficulties and weaknesses. And the relationship isn’t just companies becoming governments, but there are also governments becoming companies. In fact, I’d argue it is more common for governments to become companies than vice versa. Cuba’s GAESA is in hotels, while Myanmar’s Junta and the IRGC are pretty well diversified.
I agree with you, but you just invented Socialism again. You get your needs provided and the means of production are available for you to produce with. That’s socialism.