Sacrificial lamb

[matrixmann]

"Capitalism always needs someone to trample on. If there is no-one to exploit, no-one to do extralegal experiments on, no-one to abuse by promising him pay and then sending him home with nothing, it makes no progress.
Literally, it needs to outlaw some people to treat them like shit in order to generate the pleasures that it sells to the rest of the population. It needs them as guinea pigs, as people who work all day and all night with low or no pay, it needs them to commit all possible kinds of cruelties of humans against humans and not be held accountable for it legally."

Comments

[matrixmann]

I thought of something more systematic in it here.
Something like "without it, the system crashes / doesn't work".
Just thinking about it: Yes, under capitalism there was a ton of development ever since it became viral throughout the world. But think about it... Was it ever able, on that path, to get by without suppressing anyone? Without exploiting, without using somebody for illegal deeds? Was it ever able to make that progress without making somebody suffer in between?
...Thinking it through, I can't get upon a time where it didn't. And you know what? It even looks like it needs it.
Working under fair conditions practically, then it wouldn't make those jumps in progress. 'Cause, the conditions it would look for, and which it would need in order to do so, nobody with a sane mind agreed to accept them as conditions to work under. Not as long as he knows what's coming.
That for you need pressure of the social kind, or you need to keep people in a sort of slavery. Bound to work for that cheap payment, bound to work under extreme and even lethal conditions.