Controversial question

@FenrirIII The working class does not eat the rich because it is not aiming well at the target. What would be the point of a society whose work planning was in the hands of the workers, if wage labour and commodities were not abolished? People are not willing to sacrifice important things so that in the end nothing will change.
Entrepreneurs get rich thanks to the surplus value they extract from your labour power. Also, labour exploitation can be done by a community of workers.

Because the rich are smart enough to keep the working class divided and fighting between themselves, never realizing who the real enemy is causing all their pain.
- Besides, all the poor folks have to do is pull themselves up by their bootstraps and they too can feel like they are better than everyone else.

I'll bite:
most societies have more than 2 classes
The UK has a strong social and cultural difference between working, middle and upper class.
India and others have a caste system
- Lrrr's question applies to any number of classes. Though you could make a point that it only works if one class is larger than all others combined
  
  Haha yeah that's true, turns out my reading comprehension is r*tarded

Because what we can do to destroy them is called a crime, while what they can do to destroy us is called capitalism

Oh, I plan on it Lrrr.

Do you have any idea how full of microplastics, toxins, and artificial dyes they are? Eat them? Geez, I wouldn't eat food grown in their compost.

"The Time Machine is interpreted in modern times as a commentary on the increasing inequality and class divisions of Wells' era, which he projects as giving rise to two separate human species: the fair, childlike Eloi, and the savage, simian Morlocks, distant descendants of the contemporary upper and lower classes respectively."
"(The Time Traveller) realizes that the Morlocks control and feed upon the Eloi."

Because the rich aren't the problem. Class is. Class consciousness is the solution.

Such a non-actionable meme.
How about this: You have to go vote for the better of the two parties, because they are substantially different and one does have a history of policy and legislation supporting labor, education, access to health care, equity, and the environment.
Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying. What’s their goal?
- The world is not black and white as you ascribe. This is clearly evidenced by current events. This is not a fault of the people; rather it is the fault of those who actively invest in class warfare.
  I’m not defending those who follow Trump, Musk, or Fox News. But rather, I pity them for being put in situations to believe these institutions are truths and everything else is a lie.
- You have to go vote for the better of the two parties, because they are substantially different
  South Park was a bit ahead of the curve, but they put it quite well: you're voting between a giant douche and a turd sandwich. Neither of them are what you want, but you're stuck picking one of them.
  While the current Democratic Party is still leagues ahead of the Republican Party, they're not a party that actually cares about the layman either. They spent the last election trying to court conservatives, they refuse to act as an opposition party to Republicans, and the leadership keeps fucking over progressives.
  What we need is to throw away the winner-takes-all voting system that created a two-party system where neither party has to care about representing their voters. First past the post crushes any chance of a real opposition party from being successful, and both Republicans and Democrats benefit from that.
  Voting for the lesser evil is a moral obligation, but don't forget that you're still voting for an evil.
  
  Great idea! Totally impossible to get there from here though. We need to envision and communicate actionable steps people can actually get behind with individual action.
  “tear down and replace the US electoral system” is not such a step.
- 🤪 vote blue no matter who 🤪 Because it has worked so well in the past...