• Abundance114@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    iterally all studies about this make you wrong

    You misunderstand, we live in a world that’s capable of abundance. Go tell people in Nigeria that they have a world of abundance and see how they react; because they do not have an abundance of anything.

    • eskimofry@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 hours ago

      that would be arguing that i am speaking as if everybody’s needs have been met NOW which I am not saying. Don’t deliberately misinterpret my comment. Don’t pretend that part of why Nigerians don’t have abundance is not imperialist colonialism 2.0 wrapped in the flag of freedom, democracy and development.

      • Abundance114@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        that would be arguing that i am speaking as if everybody’s needs have been met NOW

        But that’s exactly what a world of abundance means.

        Having an over abundance in one part of the world and scarcity in another isn’t a world of abundance.

        • eskimofry@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Having an over abundance in one part pf the world and scarcity in another isn’t a world of abundance.

          You’re so close to realizing wherever humans settled had enough to sustain civilization. It’s the plundering, wars, genocides, privatization of national respurces that cause the scarcity.

          • Abundance114@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            wherever humans settled had enough to sustain

            You do understand that “had” is past tense, meaning that we do not currently have it, right?