The scariest thing is that there are people who advocate for it. Because humans are dangerous, I guess, so it's better to preemptively enslave them.
Sample
> Social control in the sense of not wanting lots of unemployed and restless youths. Having a system where long term and steady work is required in order to "live a good life" implies control - you have to act right and follow the rules in order to keep a job, which is itself necessary in order to have enough food and other necessities.
> Those making this argument here I believe are also making an argument for an alternative where the productivity of society is more equally spread, without the need to make everyone work for it.
> I agree that it's a system of social control, but I don't think it's nefarious or bad. We really don't want to live in a society where 25-year-old men don't have meaningful work to do and roam the streets getting into trouble.
The argument also doesn't _really_ make sense - there's already socially accepted system of 'social control' which _directly_ keeps people following the rules. The law.
Also unclear why lack of work would cause young people to "roam the streets" instead of staying home and roaming the internets. As they're already increasingly doing in free time.
The scariest thing is that there are people who advocate for it. Because humans are dangerous, I guess, so it's better to preemptively enslave them.
Sample
> Social control in the sense of not wanting lots of unemployed and restless youths. Having a system where long term and steady work is required in order to "live a good life" implies control - you have to act right and follow the rules in order to keep a job, which is itself necessary in order to have enough food and other necessities.
> Those making this argument here I believe are also making an argument for an alternative where the productivity of society is more equally spread, without the need to make everyone work for it.
> I agree that it's a system of social control, but I don't think it's nefarious or bad. We really don't want to live in a society where 25-year-old men don't have meaningful work to do and roam the streets getting into trouble.
The argument also doesn't _really_ make sense - there's already socially accepted system of 'social control' which _directly_ keeps people following the rules. The law.
Also unclear why lack of work would cause young people to "roam the streets" instead of staying home and roaming the internets. As they're already increasingly doing in free time.