this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
417 points (96.2% liked)

News

23361 readers
4942 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 122 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

No one with as much money as he has is a good person.

He's basically just doing ethical bumfights, exploiting the victims of capitalism for YouTube views and thereby increasing his own wealth further.

[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 46 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)
[–] kava@lemmy.world 30 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

it's an interesting moral question

if i give someone money and that alleviates their poverty, is that an ethical action? i think so. you are eliminating harm by reducing hunger, providing shelter, etc.

if i give someone money and that alleviates their poverty, but i do it for my own personal gain, is that an ethical action? you are still eliminating harm but you are doing it for an amoral reason.

ethical action, amoral motivation

then there's the perspective of by taking advantage of this individual, you are doing your part in perpetuating an unjust system. you are playing the role of the opiate of the masses. distracting and comforting those who are at the bottom of the pyramid.

having said all that, i think it's still more ethical than bumfights. although i couldn't tell you if it was ethical or not by its own

[–] NewNewAccount@lemmy.world 16 points 4 weeks ago

Defining ethics is a question as old as philosophy itself.

[–] thesporkeffect@lemmy.world 5 points 4 weeks ago

He isn't generally elevating randos out of poverty though. I don't have citations but my understanding is most of the big payouts he has done went to people in his friend group despite the implication that it was not.

[–] MataVatnik@lemmy.world 13 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

Based on some interviews there is nothing ethical about what this guy is doing. Based on one case I think he should be in jail

[–] frunch@lemmy.world 6 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

The sleep deprivation guy seemed like he could have a lawsuit against Mr. Beast. At least based on what he was saying, it sounded like what they did to him should have been illegal

[–] MataVatnik@lemmy.world 3 points 4 weeks ago

should have

Exactly, these sociopath dipshits are skirting the law on technicalities but any reasonable person would agree they should be behind bars

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

You're right, maybe not the best descriptor, but it's a hard concept to properly articulate.

Man with money finds people in need and gives them a dump truck of cash to ostensibly make their lives better. Paying for surgeries for people, buying meals for the hungry, etc. is an "ethical" alternative to paying homeless people to fight each other for entertainment. But it doesn't change the fact that it is still exploitative content that commodifies the suffering of others for his own enrichment. Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. I can't help but think he would hardly be so "generous" if he was losing more than he was getting out of it.

Not to mention he is being lionized as this capitalist success story to show that the system works, absolving the wealthy of guilt, while his success is entirely based around the fact that capitalism is failing the majority who live under it. And all of the feel-good narratives just make it easier to ignore all of the people he hasn't helped.

And now that he's made himself into a brand, he can leverage that brand to hawk overpriced, moldy food and grow even richer. And people out there are buying his brand because they believe it somehow supports a better cause than buying the overpriced, not-as-moldy food from the corporation he's competing with.

[–] GetOffMyLan@programming.dev 3 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

He wouldn't be able to do it if he was losing money though.

It's such a tricky subject.

If you don't use it to make money you can't do it anymore.

So is making money off it bad if you use that money to doore.

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

If he wants to live ethically, he should be losing money until he is reduced down to his own level of need. Mr. Beast is supposedly a Christian and that is what the ethics of that religion dictate. In an ideal economy, people shouldn't be able to hoard wealth either.

One just needs to ask why he stops where he does with his giving, and why not go further to do more good if that's supposed to be the point? Or why not use that money to stop these problems at the source rather than just providing temporary aid to a tiny subset of victims?