#*i should specify. its the type of thinking that makes ppl question the necessity of those programs (which r already barest of bones)

[wormthe]

[ image description: a screenshot of tags from the original post by tumblr user read-marx-and-lenin. the tags have been edited for clarity, and read as follows:

There is a reason why the maxim begins "from each according to their ability" after all. Like, this isn't some kind of "working hard makes you a better person" kind of thing. This is a "people depend on each other to survive and to thrive" kind of thing. When people understand that and act accordingly without having to be told, that is when the state withers away. Until then, there has to be mechanisms in place to make sure people aren't just abandoning each other out of selfishness.

/ end ID ]

"the corrolary of this is that abled people have an obligation to perform the labor to provide that care and resources."

So you think disabled people existing exploit abled people? Or what? Because I can't really tell what you're on about.

not at all, quite the opposite in fact.

there's a certain ideological faction on here- the antiwork crowd- who fully support the first part (that disabled people who can't work deserve resources and care) but are unwilling to follow it to its second part (that abled people should be obligated/incentivized to perform labor to provide this resources and care).

due to my extreme distaste for antiwork ideology and it's short-sighted first-order thinking, I feel a need to remind people of that corrolary as a tactic to ward against antiwork ideology taking root.

for every positive right we have or should have (to housing, education, healthcare, etc) there's exists a matching collective responsibility to provide that positive right. if we want to effectively provide those rights (and we should), we need to accept those responsibilities.