It’s one thing to vicariously be a decent person and virtue signal by sharing such a meme, but actually paying for it? Fuck no.
Microblog Memes
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
Wouldn't this work better if it was on the dumpster?
Having it on the door makes it performative, doesn't it
Yep. If it was on the dumpster, they might actually have to give a plate or two away.
If we could trust every last person to act on charity, and every person to accept charity only when they need it, socialism wouldn't be required.
But will this sign change when a small homeless camp sets up on their doorstep?
Supporting the public comes with its own unique set of problems. You need to do this kind of thing at scale, or it will fracture and fall apart.
Exactly. In an ideal world this type of thing would be enough, but that's not the world we live in, and charity like this is just not going to cut it. That's not to say that it isn't a kind gesture, though.
i fully expect they entirely meant well.
This is charity, not Socialism. This is providing help at the whim of one person's desires or beliefs. Charity has its place but society should use its resources to offer help to everyone in need.
Edit: And just to be clear, when we talk about socialism, we are talking about democratic socialism. That doesn't mean there isn't free market commerce, it just means that the market is regulated. Even the U.S. regulates its free market.
It's not socialism because it says nothing about the workers owning the means of production
The response is still relevant because the premise of socialism is that the industrial and agricultural revolutions have increased production to such an extent that there is no reason for anyone to go hungry.
its a sign on a door, calm down
But if we have socialism, how will the rich give the poor people the breadcrumbs to stroke their ego and appear like a benevolent monarch? Think of their feelings!
Another poor soul saved from the orphan crushing machine. How heartwarming.
A bit off topic, but this is why I avoid communities for "uplifting news". It sounds like a good concept at first, but then most of the news are based on that.
Fundamental misunderstanding. Conservatives would actually call this a win for their side IMO. This is because conservatives believe charity > socialism. If I were to be, er, charitable toward conservatives, I would say it's because they distrust government but believe in human generosity. They often really do believe in charity though, at least the comparatively sane ones that I know; it's not something that they just say to deflect.
The problem with charity IMO is that it typically performs quite poorly. The average charity is 100x less effective than the best charities (Givewell), and IIRC this is essentially true regardless of what metric you use for "best." It's also fundamentally not a fair way to distribute wealth; it doesn't help people with different problems equally; and it doesn't necessarily come from different sources in relation to how much they can give. Most people who donate have a narrow moral circle -- they care about some strangers much more than other strangers, based on questionable things like race, proximity, or religion. (Some might object to me citing Effective Altruism here, fair enough, but if you're already coming from the perspective that charity is the best way to improve the lives of those less fortunate, then it's really hard to argue with the research EA has done.)
The way I see socialism is essentially scaled-up, fair, and mandatory charity.
Conservatives would actually call this a win for their side IMO.
Abstractly. But as soon as they see it happening in person, they begin frantically dialing the police.
That's why Houston Food Not Bombs needed to get a court order forbidding the police for repeatedly ticketing them for no reason.
it’s really hard to argue with the research EA has done.
Effective altruism distills all of ethics into an overriding variable: suffering. And that fatally oversimplifies the many ways in which the living world can be valuable. Effective altruism discounts the ethical dimensions of relationships, the rich braid of elements that make up a “good life,” and the moral worth of a species or a wetland.
But setting that aside, the idea of charity is rooted in the theory that you need a popular buy-in before you can achieve significant lasting change.
That's not wrong on its face. But the modern incarnations of charity are so heavily focused on the populism (flashy PR campaigns, obnoxious and invasive marketing strategies, charity as spectacle to drive more engagement) that they often fail to deliver their states goals.
The issue isn't merely of one's moral circle, it is of one's visual range and economic heft. When you're relying on a few plutocrats to dictate philanthropic social policy, you're banking heavily on their omniscience.
It's true, most conservatives want to be entertained and heart-warmed by the idea of feeding the homeless but they don't want to do it themselves.
And they're willing to pay more money to not do it rather than do it!
I don't want my tax money saving people from destitution. I want that guy to do it so I can read about it on social media.
I’m sorry, this is nice, but a bit problematic?
- Really means gtfo of our dumpster
- At our convenience ie. Opening hours
- limited menu (!)
- “no questions asked” is this some American thing, maybe they would like a chat, is this necessary?
They could just point them in a helpful direction where they can get a selection of food, rn, for free. Does this not exist in America? It’s an attempt at “socialism” but it’s very pb&j fisted
I can't tell if this is hilarious satire or the dumbest take imaginable
Yeah it was a tongue in cheek piss take sorry
no I loved it. The mystery makes it exciting
"Yes, gtfo of our dumpster. When we are here we will give you free food, including protein and fresh produce, without hassling you about whether you deserve it or are 'needy enough'."
...but that's not good enough for you because instead of fixing an immediate need like someone's currently growling stomach, this establishment should tell them to go somewhere else?
My immediate reaction is that the owner probably took the picture himself trying to go viral and immediately took it down. Nothing gets solved in this country anymore unless there's a dollar to be made and looking like a good person is somehow more important than being a good person. Why would the person even read it on the front door? Why not discretely package some food and put it next to the dumpster with a note stuck to it? Nothing about this makes sense when you analyze it. The few real heroes of this country are unsung, the rest is just virtue signaling.
These people love the sense of broadcasting their "selfless giving", and totally not for attention and influence.
I'd like to push back on this notion.
Fundamentally it feels like saying, "a good deed is only good if done for the right reason".
That might be important for religion or some other way to measure individual morality, but as a society it really doesn't matter. In fact, having some sort of reward for helping others is useful, since it encourages people to be kind.
I would be pleased as punch if the wealthy and powerful were admired for how much they made the world a better place, instead of because of the size of the swimming pool filled with gold coins in their basement.
“But I want credit for my acts of kindness.”
-The Righteous Right
I think a lot of people read this as “I want credit for my kindness”
I actually think the real animator of the right is much worse.
They want to choose who is deserving of their kindness.
They want to be able to choose who gets help. Person that did something they don’t agree with, no help. Person that’s sympathetic to them, help.
That’s the reason they dislike systematic assistance. Because someone that doesn’t deserve help might get some.
PB&J, fresh veggies and water? I rather dig the trash.
America was so horrified at the sight of bread lines that we stopped giving the bread
Why would the person that goes through the bins go to the front of the shop to look at a piece of paper on the glass. Surely you'd post this on the bin that night?
Feels like I could write a hand written receipt from oxfam, thanking me for the 8 figure donation, and put it on my tinder profile.
The love the idea of performative goodness which costs them less than a dollar one time which they can then milk endlessly for good vibes with their fellow man buuuuut they really don't want to come off $300 every month so that the young woman who works in the same establishment can have enough to feed her kids well. It costs a lot more it scales and nobody personally thanks them or sees them being a good person when they pay the IRS to fund this. If they pay the IRS that is.