Would it be wrong to become a Modern Day Robin Hood and steal from the rich to give to the poor?

[Timewalker]

Oh, yeah, actually I do have a vague recollection of something along those lines. I don't think child me liked it much.

I like Firefly much better...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

It's been nearly 50 years since I last watched this. Considering the fact that we lived on an acreage and it was a Big Event when we finally had two TV channels to choose from, I couldn't be too picky in my choice of TV shows.

I preferred the Richard Greene version of Robin Hood, though. It drove my mother nuts when I'd wander around the house singing the theme song:

"Robin Hood, Robin Hood, riding through the glen,
Robin Hood, Robin Hood, with his band of men,
Feared by the bad, loved by the good,
Robin Hood, Robin Hood, Robin Hood."

I saw a colorized version of some of those episodes many years later. Those green tights looked ridiculous.

 

[Avro Arrow]

It's been nearly 50 years since I last watched this. Considering the fact that we lived on an acreage and it was a Big Event when we finally had two TV channels to choose from, I couldn't be too picky in my choice of TV shows.

Hmm... I watched the video, and that doesn't seem familiar in any way, sorry. I don't think I've actually seen that. I must have been vaguely remembering something else instead.

But as long as we're posting songs...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Amaris]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

GUYS why are you talking about Firefly we had Robin Hood in Star Trek

 

[Timewalker]

Hmm... I watched the video, and that doesn't seem familiar in any way, sorry. I don't think I've actually seen that. I must have been vaguely remembering something else instead.

It was on in the '60s, so I'm not sure if you're old enough to have seen it anyway.

 

[Marynator]

My favorite version of Robin Hood was the Kevin Costner one from the 1990s. I know some people didn't like it, but I have always loved it.

 

[Jayson1]

My favorite version of Robin Hood was the Kevin Costner one from the 1990s. I know some people didn't like it, but I have always loved it.

Mine is "Men in Tights." Mel Brooks can do no wrong!

Jason

 

[Spot261]

My favorite version of Robin Hood was the Kevin Costner one from the 1990s. I know some people didn't like it, but I have always loved it.

I'm pretty fond of it, not sure how much of it is nostalgia.

 

[Jayson1]

I'm pretty fond of it, not sure how much of it is nostalgia.

The thing I remember most about it is the Bryan Adams song which I liked. The movie was just okay IMO. It was way better than the Russel Crowe movie so it deserves credit for that. I also recall their being a "Hercules" type of show in the 90's or early 2000's but I never watched it. When you think about it I think Bruce Campbells "Jack of all Trades" was a similar show with similar themes and I loved it. In fact I rewatched it just a few weeks ago on Youtube.

Jason

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Mine is "Men in Tights." Mel Brooks can do no wrong!

"Unlike SOME other Robin Hoods, I can speak with an English accent."

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

I've never liked Robin Hood, I'd go so far as to say I'm repulsed by the whole motif.

As to the fascinating question proposed by the OP what good would it do? You mention Trump, lets say I'm a reporter or a cleaner or an interior decorator and I'm in some Trump hovel doing some job. What do I steal? A bauble sitting around on a side table that could maybe be flogged for 1k assuming I knew exactly what it was and its worth. It has to fit in my pocket, so no art pieces and it has to maybe not be noticed right away so I'm not arrested. It has to be something any amount of people could take. So I get my bauble and I sell it and I give it to a family I know that can't pay their heating bill for the winter. But maybe I could have just given them 1k myself and gone without something instead? And not risked my career and reputation?

Anyway stealing from the rich.. a better use of my time and ingenuity would be to convince the rich that donating money is very cool, very hip. Gwyneth should have GOOP rebranded so it stands for Giving Ostentatiously Oogenisizes Peace. No that's not what oogenesis means but turning it into a verb suitably suits Gwyenth because it sounds very creative and sciency all at the same time.

Culty feel good stuff about giving has only ever been about giving to the leader of the cult or church or whatever. It's never been an amazing viral activity in which you give to the poor. But it could be. Rich people could be boasting and competing about how much they give and who had the poorest, crappiest poor they gave to and whose poor were the most transformed and grateful and then there could be MLM giving so you are REALLY winning and on top if your poor became rich givers to the next layer of poor and down and down it went. This could work.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

This is certainly a very limited viewpoint.

So we're clear, my argument that even self-made rich people most of the time started with some kind of wealth, have to depend on public infrastructure for themselves as well as employees, the labour of said employees, as well as luck (which you yourself admit later in your post with your "that's life") is a limited viewpoint, but this

In reality most people who are rich worked very hard and sacrificed a lot for it. Those who were lucky enough to inherit money certainly don't keep it long unless they are smart about it. Yes, many a hard-working and smart person fail and many succeed; that's life. I would rather work hard and fail and try again than to sit around a bitch about rich people and fantasize about stealing from them. It's a pretty pathetic notion IMHO

is broad thinking?!

Then again, this made me remember you from that debate about minimum wage quite some time ago, and I seem to remember you being all about elitism and throwing around insulting statements about people who disagreed with you (including myself), as well as ignoring facts that those people brought up to counter your arguments. So, instead of engaging in another such doomed debate by researching and writing for hours for posts that you won't treat seriously, anyway, I'll simply link this one article by the great Noam Chomsky for those honestly interested:

Noam Chomsky| "Nothing for Other People": Class War in the United States

 

[Jayson1]

I've never liked Robin Hood, I'd go so far as to say I'm repulsed by the whole motif.

As to the fascinating question proposed by the OP what good would it do? You mention Trump, lets say I'm a reporter or a cleaner or an interior decorator and I'm in some Trump hovel doing some job. What do I steal? A bauble sitting around on a side table that could maybe be flogged for 1k assuming I knew exactly what it was and its worth. It has to fit in my pocket, so no art pieces and it has to maybe not be noticed right away so I'm not arrested. It has to be something any amount of people could take. So I get my bauble and I sell it and I give it to a family I know that can't pay their heating bill for the winter. But maybe I could have just given them 1k myself and gone without something instead? And not risked my career and reputation?

Anyway stealing from the rich.. a better use of my time and ingenuity would be to convince the rich that donating money is very cool, very hip. Gwyneth should have GOOP rebranded so it stands for Giving Ostentatiously Oogenisizes Peace. No that's not what oogenesis means but turning it into a verb suitably suits Gwyenth because it sounds very creative and sciency all at the same time.

Culty feel good stuff about giving has only ever been about giving to the leader of the cult or church or whatever. It's never been an amazing viral activity in which you give to the poor. But it could be. Rich people could be boasting and competing about how much they give and who had the poorest, crappiest poor they gave to and whose poor were the most transformed and grateful and then there could be MLM giving so you are REALLY winning and on top if your poor became rich givers to the next layer of poor and down and down it went. This could work.

Only problem relying on the charity is the amount they give might be small compared to how much is giving to them through corporate welfare. Remember when Trump promised to give 1 million dollars to a school. That million I imagine is peanuts compared to how much he has stolen or screwed people over to make more money. I agree going around and physically taking stuff would be risky and not worth it beyond being a symbolic gesture. I would imagine modern Robin Hoods would be computer Hackers who can get into someones money and transfer it to somewhere else and then launder the money and then give it to a noble place that wants to help the poor. The more I talk about this it has occurred to me I feel like I am talking about the premise of "Mr Robot."

Jason

 

[MacLeod]

The thing I remember most about it is the Bryan Adams song which I liked. The movie was just okay IMO

Jason

God not that song, it was everywhere 16 weeks at Number 1 (in the UK). But the best part about the film was Alan Rickman was the Sheriff.

So the question is stealing right, our laws say No.

As for taxation, we often use a progressive tax system where the more you earn the more you pay, so which would be more beneficial cutting the lower bands and keeping the higher bands the same or increasing them, adding new higher bands for those that earn say over 10million a year? The issue that can arise is that those with the money can try and use that to influence those who make policy to favour them.

 

[feek61]

So we're clear, my argument that even self-made rich people most of the time started with some kind of wealth, have to depend on public infrastructure for themselves as well as employees, the labour of said employees, as well as luck (which you yourself admit later in your post with your "that's life") is a limited viewpoint, but this



is broad thinking?!

Then again, this made me remember you from that debate about minimum wage quite some time ago, and I seem to remember you being all about elitism and throwing around insulting statements about people who disagreed with you (including myself), as well as ignoring facts that those people brought up to counter your arguments. So, instead of engaging in another such doomed debate by researching and writing for hours for posts that you won't treat seriously, anyway, I'll simply link this one article by the great Noam Chomsky for those honestly interested:

Noam Chomsky| "Nothing for Other People": Class War in the United States

LOL, I don't remember you specifically but I do remember that someone was outraged because my beliefs and life-experiences were different than theirs and I was bold enough to post my thoughts against those of the mob. Well, so you think stealing is ok? Fine, think what you want but lets just agree to disagree because to me the premise of this thread is absurd.

I have to go to work now.

 

[Marynator]

I feel that we may have misinterpreted Jayson's original question and over complicated it. Jayson please correct me if I am wrong, but might another way of stating your original question be "Is it acceptable to commit a crime/break the law for a just cause?"

If that is the case, I feel I would have to say no. My reason is that the concept of justice can be subjective to individuals. I myself might feel that my cause is righteous, but what if it really is not? I would only really have my own personal experiences and knowledge to draw from. How do I really know that my victims are in the wrong? I do not believe I am wise enough to make these types of decisions beyond the scope of the law. I don't think it would take long for people to go from "This person is sick and can't afford their medicine, so I will steal it for them" to "My family needs a car, but we can't afford one so I'll just take one from this rich person" to "This person is is wealthy and healthy, it is right for me to take their liver".

At least in a democratic society, we have options for changing laws that are unjust. In extreme circumstances, I do believe that revolution may be necessary against a tyrannical dictatorship, as we have seen happen in the past.

 

[suarezguy]

I think the term rich is, outside of the obvious basic of being not-poor, pretty hazy. Most people we wouldn't think of as being rich are still a lot richer than many others, even than just the poor, and have a lot of things they don't need so it's probably self-serving and unprincipled to think that it's OK for us to have a lot of things we don't need but wrong for others who have a whole whole lot of things they don't need to have them. So yeah, stealing is wrong regardless of the target and how much they have.

And even regardless of that, if they were found out recipients would probably get in a lot of legal trouble for accepting stolen goods.

 

[Jayson1]

I've never liked Robin Hood, I'd go so far as to say I'm repulsed by the whole motif.

As to the fascinating question proposed by the OP what good would it do? You mention Trump, lets say I'm a reporter or a cleaner or an interior decorator and I'm in some Trump hovel doing some job. What do I steal? A bauble sitting around on a side table that could maybe be flogged for 1k assuming I knew exactly what it was and its worth. It has to fit in my pocket, so no art pieces and it has to maybe not be noticed right away so I'm not arrested. It has to be something any amount of people could take. So I get my bauble and I sell it and I give it to a family I know that can't pay their heating bill for the winter. But maybe I could have just given them 1k myself and gone without something instead? And not risked my career and reputation?

Anyway stealing from the rich.. a better use of my time and ingenuity would be to convince the rich that donating money is very cool, very hip. Gwyneth should have GOOP rebranded so it stands for Giving Ostentatiously Oogenisizes Peace. No that's not what oogenesis means but turning it into a verb suitably suits Gwyenth because it sounds very creative and sciency all at the same time.

Culty feel good stuff about giving has only ever been about giving to the leader of the cult or church or whatever. It's never been an amazing viral activity in which you give to the poor. But it could be. Rich people could be boasting and competing about how much they give and who had the poorest, crappiest poor they gave to and whose poor were the most transformed and grateful and then there could be MLM giving so you are REALLY winning and on top if your poor became rich givers to the next layer of poor and down and down it went. This could work.

Only problem relying on the charity is the amount they give might be small compared to how much is giving to them through corporate welfare. Remember when Trump promised to give 1 million dollars to a school. That million I imagine is peanuts compared to how much he has stolen or screwed people over to make more money. I agree going around and physically taking stuff would be risky and not worth it beyond being a symbolic gesture. I would imagine modern Robin Hoods would be computer Hackers who can get into someones money and transfer it to somewhere else and then launder the money and then give it to a noble place that wants to help the poor. The more I talk about this it has occurred to me I feel like I am talking about the premise of "Mr Robot."

Jason

I feel that we may have misinterpreted Jayson's original question and over complicated it. Jayson please correct me if I am wrong, but might another way of stating your original question be "Is it acceptable to commit a crime/break the law for a just cause?"

If that is the case, I feel I would have to say no. My reason is that the concept of justice can be subjective to individuals. I myself might feel that my cause is righteous, but what if it really is not? I would only really have my own personal experiences and knowledge to draw from. How do I really know that my victims are in the wrong? I do not believe I am wise enough to make these types of decisions beyond the scope of the law. I don't think it would take long for people to go from "This person is sick and can't afford their medicine, so I will steal it for them" to "My family needs a car, but we can't afford one so I'll just take one from this rich person" to "This person is is wealthy and healthy, it is right for me to take their liver".

At least in a democratic society, we have options for changing laws that are unjust. In extreme circumstances, I do believe that revolution may be necessary against a tyrannical dictatorship, as we have seen happen in the past.

That was the basic concept of the thread. Though the pratical ways one would become "Robin Hood" in the modern world is a interesting thing to think about as well. For me the answer comes down to how much faith does one have in the system to correct injustices. I don't think if this was the 90's I would be so open to the idea but to me the entire system seems to be falling apart and we no longer seem to have any real leaders anymore who I trust is even interested in fixing things. The number of politicans I trust could be counted on one hand and i'm not even sure if I really even trust them

Jason

 

[Amaris]

I feel that we may have misinterpreted Jayson's original question and over complicated it. Jayson please correct me if I am wrong, but might another way of stating your original question be "Is it acceptable to commit a crime/break the law for a just cause?"

If that is the case, I feel I would have to say no. My reason is that the concept of justice can be subjective to individuals. I myself might feel that my cause is righteous, but what if it really is not? I would only really have my own personal experiences and knowledge to draw from. How do I really know that my victims are in the wrong? I do not believe I am wise enough to make these types of decisions beyond the scope of the law. I don't think it would take long for people to go from "This person is sick and can't afford their medicine, so I will steal it for them" to "My family needs a car, but we can't afford one so I'll just take one from this rich person" to "This person is is wealthy and healthy, it is right for me to take their liver".

At least in a democratic society, we have options for changing laws that are unjust. In extreme circumstances, I do believe that revolution may be necessary against a tyrannical dictatorship, as we have seen happen in the past.

Eh, I'm fine with breaking laws if I feel they are either unjust, or warrant breaking. For example, the old "would you rescue a drowning man from a lake if there was a sign that said 'No Swimming'" scenario. Of course I would break that law without a second thought. Same for any situation where I feel if I don't, then someone will be harmed. Granted, that makes it up to me to define necessity, and that my definition may not be agreed upon by law enforcement, but then I often disagree with law enforcement anyway. Being anti-authoritarian has that kind of effect.

 

[urbandefault]

how much he has stolen or screwed people over