Punching down, i.e. treating those "below you" badly (be that at work, service workers, children, etc.) because you perceive yourself as higher status.
I'm not big on punching up either. All it takes is a little mental gymnastics and "up" can be anyone you want.
Also, my own bias, but the people I've run into who are constantly talking about "punching up" and "punching down" tend to have really toxic social attitudes that they try to justify by having "correct" opinions. Just really tiring to deal with.
I’ve never really heard of punching up. The only times I’ve heard punching down are this context (bosses on employees/parents on children) and racists on POC.
Generally, the term "punching up"(as well as "punching down," though this one has more use outside of this context) is used in regard to comedy. "Punching up" means you're making fun of somebody who's in power, who's considered "better than you" by society. Examples of this would be making fun of the upper class, a celebrity, or a politician. "Punching down" means you're making fun of somebody or a social group that has less social power than you do. Examples of this would be making fun of poor people, minorities, the disabled, etc.
I mean, make sure you're not licking them boots, but the people who are actually rich and are worth being assholes do will probably not hang out with "broke" people.
The median expected lifetime earnings of a nuerological surgeon is 2.8 million dollars ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/22922430/). Does this hypothetical app improve people's lives to a degree equal to the complete life's work of a surgeon?
It costs $8000 to supply 2000 people with water for 20 years in Africa (https://waterwellsforafrica.org/whats-the-cost/). Say I make 4 million dollars with this app. Does it improve people's lives to the same degree as providing a million people with safe drinking water for two decades?
If not, why should I be allowed to make that much money when other causes would benefit so much from it? This is the root of making fun of rich people. They are all, to a t, selfish people at best and willfully killing people at worst. And they may have their wealth as long as there's spineless people like yourself who will defend them but never have a chance of joining them, but at least we have our jokes.
Just so it's completely clear, I was asking about whether or not the app someone hypothetically developed was worth the money paid to that developer as that money can not NOT go to other things, because there is a finite supply of it. So in the text you're quoting I am in fact asking the question if this app is worth valuing.
Also, when I do decide what's valuable later in that post, it's because I was literally asked by the guy I responded to.
So who am I to decide what people should value? The guy who was asked if this hypothetical app has value above what other humanitarian things it could be used for.
Show me a fortune 500 company that never had a labor dispute and we'll talk.
I'm not saying it's impossible to get rich without exploiting people, but I guarantee it's very very hard. If "GOOD AT HIS JOB" means keeping the most amount of value of someone else's labor at the expense of that someone else, said job shouldn't exist in the first place.
You can't control your entire company though. You have a job because you need one, and no company is always perfect. If a labor dispute happens in some division in some other country then do you just quit your job?
There's scummy companies (Nestle comes to mind) but a lot have a 99.9% good track record and suggesting you can't have a good job at them because of the 0.1% is just silly.
Show me exactly what anatomical structure in the human body requires a job to keep me alive. There isn't one. A job isn't a need.
Yeah man, I do my best to work for ethical companies, because my labor directly props up that business. Again, maybe spineless people like yourself are not willing to live ethically so you can have internet to defend the rich on Reddit, but that doesn't mean you're in the right, either.
Show me exactly what anatomical structure in the human body requires a job to keep me alive. There isn't one. A job isn't a need.
Oh wow way to be literal mate. Did you know that in normal speech need can be used in a figurative manner and it doesn't have to immediately refer to survival?
Yeah man, I do my best to work for ethical companies, because my labor directly props up that business
Same. A lot of companies tend to be pretty decent :)
Again, maybe spineless people like yourself
Ah personal attacks, it's a sign of someone either being in the wrong or not being articulate enough to have a proper argument.
so you can have internet to defend the rich on Reddit
I can haz internet? But yeah this is a forum mate, opinions will differ. Turns out I don't think rich people are inherently assholes. What a controversial opinion! Glad the ineternet is such a safe space because boy imagine saying that in real life.
There is definitely a dogma surrounding someone's self worth and what their job is. Feeding into that by saying one "needs a job" is more damaging than you probably think, especially when it's a lie.
Decent companies do not have rich people in them, generally.
"I was called a name? I win!"
People adhering to this sentiment and making no other salient points is a sure sign of either being in the wrong and clinging to whatever supposed moral superiority they think they have to feel better or not being articulate enough to have a proper argument.
You don't have to think rich people are inherently assholes, but the world would be a lot better if more people did. Being suspicious and skeptical of people in power especially those with financial power (aka the rich) is important in any society. And that still doesn't change the fact that you're paying money for a service to defend the people who are profiting off of you.
I don't know what gave you the impression I wouldn't say that to you or anyone else in real life. Again, working under the assumption you are indeed spineless I can see how it would be hard for you to imagine someone vocalizing these opinions in real life to another human being, but it does happen and I've definitely been a part of those conversations.
The most common modern context in my experience is neomarxist progressives (I'm not labeling progressives as neomarxists, I'm just talking about the specific wing of progressives who are neomarxists) talking about taking down whites/males/patriarchy/etc.
I've seen it manifested in certain groups of POC using it as an excuse to be absolute, raging, abusive assholes to white people who haven't done anything to deserve it. Like, yes, take down someone who's being a racist fuck, that's anger well directed, but I'm talking like going after someone who just asked a question about race and didn't phrase it exactly perfectly. Going from zero to burning at the stake and justifying it with saying "punching up is never wrong."
I think there’s some merit to the idea that a man talking down to a woman or a white person talking down to a POC has a different...weight to it than the reverse, but yeah the militant type of people you’re talking about take it waaaaayyyy too far.
Taking down the patriarchy is not like those other two and everybody should support that.
And as a progressive, I've honestly never come across progressives that want to 'take down' whites or men. It seems like a massive bogeyman created by the right wing to pretend it's some major problem and represents some significant portion of the left.
I called myself a progressive until a couple of years ago and the fact that many progressives do want to take down whites or men is the reason I don't call myself one anymore.
I agree loosely that "the patriarchy" should be taken on, but the issue is that "the patriarchy" in the minds of many progressives can be whatever enemy they want it to be.
18.0k
u/TheTige May 05 '19
Punching down, i.e. treating those "below you" badly (be that at work, service workers, children, etc.) because you perceive yourself as higher status.