• Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    Somebody once advanced the theory that the pyramids may have been public works projects, to keep the whole economy from collapsing. The pharaohs had accumulated so much of the available wealth, they spent some of it to put people to work. I think that’s an interesting speculation.

    • RQG@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 hours ago

      So trickle down eventually works. You just have to let them get to godhood first. Got it.

      Capitalism probably

    • outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      In my experience the overwhelming maj{rity of believers don’t. Theyll say they do and argue and gwt offended, bit its just an identity/social thing to them.

      It’s kinda sad,

    • pirateKaiser@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      13 hours ago

      I honestly forget that frequently. My general attitude when any type of believer says something I consider obvious bullshit is to spend a couple of seconds thinking we’re in on a pretend joke until it hits me.

  • Oxysis/Oxy@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    18 hours ago

    I mean the artisans who worked on the pyramids were payed quite well. They even got buried nearby when they eventually passed away.

    And no, slaves were not the ones building a the pyramids.

      • cattywampas@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 hours ago

        This is speculation but I’d bet there was some amount of less-than-voluntary aspect to the construction of at least some of the pyramids. As in “we’ll pay you, but this is your job for the next 30 years while you’re not harvesting.”

        • shneancy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          to be fair, there was fuck all to do inbetween harvests. if someone came up to me as i’m bored out of my mind watching grains grow and said “hey wanna help build a huge fucking triangle? the pharaoh pays well” i’d say yes in a heartbeat. i doubt they had trouble finding workers

    • OfCourseNot@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      12 hours ago

      ‘Paid’. When some egyptaboo tells you that “there weren’t slaves in Egypt at this time”, remember the ‘workers’ were paid in housing, bread, and beer. And were kinda bound by their duty to the God-Pharaoh. Totally not slavery!

      Tho now thinking of it it’s not like my wage stretches farther than that either…

      Edit: spelling and punctuation are hard.

      • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 hour ago

        remember the ‘workers’ were paid in housing, bread, and beer.

        That’s more than many people will get today from a single job. 💀

    • SippyCup@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      In medieval times that’s certainly true. Egyptian laborers were paid. Generally in food and housing, as coinage wouldn’t be introduced for quite some time. Especially skilled laborers were sometimes given land. Egypt had a very routinized farming season and most laborers were farmers with nothing to farm in the off season.

      Skilled stone masons could kinda go wherever so locking them in to work with taxes was a great way to get them to leave.

      Fun fact, they had a daily meal of a particularly thick beer that had chunks of bread in it. And one time they went on strike when they ran out of wigs.

  • Lucky_777@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Glory and worship is equally addictive as profit. The whole point was to have a badass setup in the afterlife. So you could consider this “profit”

  • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I mean the pyramids were wholly improductive multi-decade undertakings, so that’s not making the point you think it’s making.

    • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Of course it’s not necessary. The democracy +capitalism combo is just the least worst setup we figured out so far.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        17 hours ago

        The democracy +capitalism combo is just the least worst setup we figured out so far.

        That’s what the state propagandists tell us, anyway.

      • balderdash@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        17 hours ago

        The global south would disagree with you.

        Its working out pretty well for the wealthy in colonialist countries though.

        • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Why does it sound like you think “least worst” is synonymous with “good”? And you are also combining your opinion of the type of system with specific implementations of it. The two are related, but separate. For example, an autocrat can be a fantastic leader, and overall great for their country and everyone in it. That doesn’t mean an autocratic government is a good system in the general sense.

          • balderdash@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            By what metric is capitalism the “least worst” system? Most of the people who defend capitalism have to sell their labor and own zero capital. The result is a two-tiered system where the obscenely wealthy exist right next to a vast majority who don’t have enough savings to survive a minor emergency. This is the situation in rich countries. The ongoing exploitation throughout so-called “third-world” capitalist countries also speaks against capitalism.

            Moreover, if socialism is such a bad system, why did America fight tooth and nail to stop it? Diplomatic isolation, trade embargos, propaganda, political assassinations. It is because socialism actually threatens the profits of the wealthy. The west can’t exploit the land, labor, and resources of nations that place the workers in charge of their own workplaces. Maybe if the most powerful country in the history of the world wasn’t working against it the system could prove its worth.

      • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        All of the democratic socialist countries would like a word. Unfortunately, the CIA already killed them all.

        Edit: To clarify, capitalism + democracy goes out of its way to fuck any other burgeoning system from getting its legs. So, I don’t think it’s fair to state “it’s the least worst”.