NYC Approves Apartment Building With Separate Entrance for Poor People

[F4lconF16]

65. I think you misread what I said.

I did not mean to imply you were blaming them for being poor, just that you were blaming them for not fighting back.

I agree with most of what you said here. I just have a problem with the way you say some of it. The poor do have a responsibility to fight back against what is wrong; I don't disagree with that. And you're right, I did say that "This isn't like bigotry, where I do blame the people who don't speak up". I'll take that back. Perhaps a better way to say what I meant is that I don't blame them for not speaking up in certain cases. Both bigotry and oppression (economically enslaving someone) should be spoken out against. That said, I don't blame them for not saying something about economic oppression when they don't have the ability to do so.

Many people are in a situation where speaking out can bring themselves and their families harm, either directly or indirectly. I don't blame someone for working or shopping at Walmart, despite the fact that they are then helping a horrible corporation enslave more people, because sometimes that is their only option. I'm not going to go after them for not boycotting Walmart; I'm going to go after the company itself. In no way am I saying that the poor are "incapable of fighting for justice", because someone in that situation with Walmart certainly could boycott, but instead I am saying that there are perhaps reasons they don't. I won't blame a single mother for taking the only job available to her to support her children even if it's a job that supports that evil, and I don't think that "reflects poorly" on her at all.

I'd like to say it again: I believe the poor have a responsibility to fight for their rights. I believe they should vote for candidates that will help them. They should say something at dinner table discussions if someone else excuses the right wing and their corporate taskmasters. But there's a lot of times they can't "do the right thing", like my Walmart example.

Next, you say that they should move in, and then hit the owners with a lawsuit. I disagree that that's always an option: many people don't have the resources or the time to do so. Many people work two jobs to make ends meet. I don't blame them for not sticking up for what's right then, because they can't. And that's the main problem I had when I read your initial post. I don't agree that it reflects badly on the poor when they "let themselves be made doormats" because I don't think they're just letting it happen. I disagree strongly with that statement.

What you've said afterwards, I agree with more. The poor absolutely can and should fight for themselves. They should get this hashed out in our court systems before this economic situation gets even worse. I just disagree that they should be blamed when they can't, even if that means they're not always doing what's "right".

As for your last statement, I think you're right, to a point. We need people that are willing to die for their causes. I agree that life without being willing to die for the things most important to you is in a sense slavery. But what things are most important are where we might disagree again: to me, it sounds like you would say that someone not willing to die for a cause would be enslaved. But what about a parent? What about those with responsibilities towards others? I am in a situation where if needed, I could die for a cause, for the greater good. Others? That might not be the case, because others depend on them. I would disagree that that means they are slaves or have less than true freedom.

I think we're on the same side here. We both want the problem to be fixed. We both think everybody has a moral responsibility to do what is right. I just ask that we don't go after the people who can't help, who can't change things because of the situation they've been stuck in.