Ask Lemmy

No.

The killing of the CEO was a one-off event.

There would need to be readily apparent will to revolt, or a slow buildup of tit-for-tat escalating action/reaction between have-not and the rich…. More killings and active attacks, more police trying to crush any protest or anyone rebelling, harsher and harsher punishment for resistance or protest, and a wealthy class protecting themselves as much as possible while telling everyone (most likely through the press and government they own) how bad it would be for everyone were they to be killed or the system disrupted.

There are plenty of alternatives to eat the rich.

UBI does not make the rich any poorer. It just decentralizes power so that all can survive and eliminates crime.

While our electoral politics is divided between either "pro business" or "hamas supporting communist radical left", it could seem reasonable to constrain oligarchy and Israel first rule while still being pro economic growth and prosperity. This requires an "eat the media stooges" who refuse to tell the difference along with a forceful message that the DNC doesn't support.

Understanding that DNC are worthless pig fuckers meant to fundraise and not empower ordinary people is step 1 to progress.

Yes pls.

Since most people would be too happy to be (very) rich themselves, I doubt that will ever happen. Or only if we were to live in a "eat the other than me rich" society? ;)

I know this question is silly but something about this irks me

No

I certainly hope not, given how an “eat the rich” society generally becomes an “eat your children” society in short order.

Nah it looks like they're just throwing them back on the streets.

No

No its just one event. The first time I've seen this on Lemmy and I can't blame people for not being sad about it.

Anything else would be Stockholm syndrome.

You might feel happy about this in your far left wonderland. But in the real world, the consequence of stuff like this spreading will be that CEOs will acquire better security, nobody will ever be able to even glance at them without getting tasered and you the consumer are going to pay for all of it.

Changing the social security system into a centralized one might work, but note that scandinavia (the place that has championed such systems) is having pretty big problems with their health care systems as well.

Perhaps IT work has tarnished my political mind as well, but I tend to think more and more that it's not about the ideology, but about the implementation that matters.