Comment by JumpCrisscross

17 hours ago

Combined with the increasing acceptance of shoplifting [1] and unprecedented corruption and criminality among our national leaders, it's hard not to read this as a moral page turning on American culture.

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/04/hasan-piker-jia-to...

The fish rots from the head. It's a sucker's game to aspire to selflessly serve the greater good when the most powerful people in the land are brazenly corrupt pedophiles. In other words: monkey see, monkey do.

  • Yes, and: the rot started long ago, this is just what it looks like when it goes unchecked. To quote Mencius:

    Mencius went to see King Hui of Liang. The king said, “Venerable sir, since you have not counted it far to come here, may I presume that you are provided with counsels to profit my kingdom?”

    Mencius replied, “Why must Your Majesty use that word ‘profit’? What I am provided with are counsels to benevolence and righteousness, and these are my only topics.

    If Your Majesty say, ‘What is to be done to profit my kingdom?’ the great officers will say, ‘What is to be done to profit our families?’ and the inferior officers and common people will say, ‘What is to be done to profit our persons?’ Superiors and inferiors will try to snatch this profit one from another, and the kingdom will be endangered.”

  • > fish rots from the head

    Does it? Did it? We elected the "brazenly corrupt pedophiles."

    This question seems complex and important enough to not be resolved with a truism.

    • The brazenly corrupt also own the vast media ecosystem that can help swing elections. Should we all know better? Probably. But they control the education system too, so…

    • It really doesn’t. Trump wouldn’t survive election if the electorate didn’t seek, or at least tolerate whatever the hell you can call that. Americans will conveniently point fingers at him (as is their political tradition) but he’s a consequence of a much deeper disease.

  • > The fish rots from the head.

    The old adage that the people elect the governance they deserve; comes to mind. The concepts of Virtue, Honour, Duty, and Justice have been declining in the West over a very long period (this is not a US specific thing). The rotting head reflects the rotting society.

    > It's a sucker's game to aspire to selflessly serve the greater good when the most powerful people in the land are brazenly corrupt

    You don’t act honourably because that will “get you ahead”. You act honourably because it is right.

    • You don't need "virtue", "honour", and "duty" to have NOT have voted the way people did. It is plain to see which chosen leader will torch the nation and which will not, regardless of people's distaste for the establishment politicians.

      It is worse than self interest. It is brazen ignorance.

      1 reply →

    • > You don’t act honourably because that will “get you ahead”. You act honourably because it is right.

      As much as I would like to believe that’s true I don’t think it is.

      You act honourably because society incentivises you to. To act dishonourably is to be disadvantaged, to be shamed, to be cast out. That is the part that’s missing today.

      3 replies →

    • > You act honourably because it is right.

      Well, and because it's not typically fatal in very short order.

      The problem comes in when honor makes you a target to erase by people more powerful than you. Being dead right gets you nowhere.

    • > The old adage that the people elect the governance they deserve; comes to

      this idea has always bothered me. i think people (even ones i disagree with) deserve better.

  • It's a nice saying, but the "head" changes every 4-8 years and this is a problem that has gotten worse over decades. Sometimes the rot doesn't start from the head.

  • Or it is a dilution of the culture through mass media, social media, and immigration from countries with different values.

    • Everyone has an anecdote of the immigrant they know who's a much better "American" in their values. The same for anecdotes of the people with the least American values being home grown and inbred

    • None of those corrupt leaders is from elsewhere. And native born americans have higher criminality then immigrants.

      All of that corrupt leadership is celebrated by american americans who see themselves as true americans.

I've known a lot of people who justify crimes like shoplifting by the fact that these corporations have stolen from them (and not in some abstract way, often literal wage theft) and felt like the social contract was already broken. And it's not like the leaders at the large corporations I've worked at generally seem to care about their employees or customers (I would describe most places I worked at as, at best, amoral. I've heard "well, if we didn't do it some other less ethical company would" too many times).

Edit: not that I'm pro-shoplifting, it's that the article talks about them breaking the "social contract" (though the article is more of a reality show-esque piece as it's a opinions writer beefing with Twitch streamers and doesn't talk to any people actually shoplifting).

  • Literal wage theft is rampant, so yeah in some ways I understand why people would feel that way.

    I’m still mad about a company I worked at over 12 years ago who stole from me and never paid my Super.

  • The thing is grocery stores make very little money, usually low single digit percentage profits, that surprisingly low rates of shoplifting can sink a store and force it to close. Shoplifting, especially the trend of rich people performatively shoplifting, dramatically harms the local community

    • Yeah, I'm very much not pro-shoplifting generally, I'm just anti the idea that corporations are upholding some social contract about stealing when they've literally stolen from many of my friends (tons of wage theft, illegal firing for reporting issues, etc). From the article, both the Twitch streamer and the writer sound insufferable and I don't agree with the points either makes.

This doesn't seem particularly related?

  • I mean, given that belief in moral decline is essentially based on illusory perceptions anyway[1], it's not too surprising that someone handwringing about it would also hallucinate connections between two disparate phenomena they opted to characterize as examples of such.

    If you opt to habitually rationalize human behavior in a manner that is detached from concern with nuance or driving forces then some amount of reality denial is probably inevitable

    [1] See e.g. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06137-x

> Combined with the increasing acceptance of shoplifting [1]

Hasan Piker (one of the people in that link) is a streamer who got popular for extremist takes and controversy. He's just doing what he does to stay famous in that interview. The other person is a writer for The New Yorker who apparently enjoys controversy too.

This interview isn't representative of anything other than two people trying to be edgy because they want their interview to go viral.

  • Hasan piker has extremely bland and milquetoast takes compared to most of the left. He's just the one currently being sold to boomers as a terrorist. But any sane country would see him as a moderate (moderating between "anarchy" and the insanity of two identical corporate parties beholden to israel)

> it's hard not to read this as a moral page turning on American culture.

Are unsupervised examinations common in the US? Or is this, in fact, simply one institution coming in to line with common US national and international practice?

  • This is not common in an in-person setting -- nearly "unheard of" outside of elite schools or particular faculty at particular programs. So it is the latter

People can still behave honorably despite all this. It's easy (and wrong) to justify someone's dishonorable behavior by pointing to the leaders.

  “But what about the argument that if everyone just starts stealing wantonly,” Spiegelman replies, “Whole Foods will eventually raise the prices?”

  “Yeah, chaos,” Piker says. “Full chaos. Let’s go.”

  “I kind of am inclined toward this,” Tolentino adds. “Everyone, try it. See what happens.”

Personal shoppers for everyone! Point at what you want or add it on an app. Eventually would take force/fraud/violence to shoplift (hey I said EVENTUALLY!) :)

Source: gas station snack acquisition after 10pm in some USA urban areas, plus stories from abroad

  • Isn't that how stores used to work, before store owners decided it'd be cheaper to just let shoppers bring up a basket of goods? You'd go up to the shopkeeper behind the counter with a list, they'd get it all for you?

    • Yup, and that requires extra labor to fulfill, which will cost money. Luckily, I haven't heard anyone complain about high prices of groceries lately, so I'm sure everyone would be fine with that.

    • Cheaper, and maybe easier to sell personal items with a little more discretion.

      That kind of service should be available for those who want it, assuming demand exists. Those who want self checkout or whatever else should not worry about their access being restricted due to wealthy authors shoplifting lemons.

      (obviously no one here is going to bed crying tonight about the gall of hungry people to steal bread, I’m not even anti UBI or anything, just attempting to analyze a trajectory)

> [...] it's hard not to read this as a moral page turning on American culture.

Turning into what from where is the interesting part.

Idk about corruption, but the shoplifting trend has come from corporate america's wholesale looting of the country. The social contract was abandoned many decades ago.

You ever seen a man over 40 pull a building permit for work wholly within his own home? Yeah me either.

These days college kids are just as jaded. Of course they cheat the instant they think they can get away with it.

The college is there to serve the college, not them and these days the kids know it. Even if everyone cheating degrades the value of the degree there's no guarantee the college won't do that itself if everyone is honest so might as well get away with what you can while you can. Nobody likes this, it's just a rational adaptation to the perceived state of affairs.

> Combined with the increasing acceptance of shoplifting

It's the K-shaped economy. Those not participating in the upsides are electing to either not participate in the system at all or to destroy it. Most people think Luigi Mangione is a hero.

We had a good post-WWII run. We had factories, then globalization. Massive growth for all economic backgrounds for several generations. But the world caught up. Now the average worker has to compete against their increasingly competent and economically enabled peers around the globe. Costs for everything are rising.

We used to have a super sized Big Mac economy propped up by the fact that America was (relatively) peerless. The worker saw so much upside. Now they don't even get free refills, so to speak.

I'm hoping the AI boom helps bring down the cost of goods without putting people out of work. If it goes the other way, I think we might be heading for 1790's France.

  • > Most people think Luigi Mangione is a hero.

    Given that UHC started approving lots of procedures and drugs after the assassination shows that their medical insurance mass fraud did happen and paid off... And they quit it.

    And then they were sued by shareholders for approving said procedures. Boo fucking hoo the shareholders lost a buck.

    Note that insurance fraud ALWAYS targets the individual policyholder, and NEVER the insurance company.

    If Luigi did it, then he should be significantly credited for a massive harm reduction by using violence to ensure less fraud perpetrated by UHC.

    The US government wouldnt do their fucking job (investigation amd criminal charges of insurance fraud). So a citizen had to.

    • What a disgusting take. Leftists such as yourself are beyond the pale. Luigi murdered someone in cold blood. You can civil society like that. Leftists are always going fascists but I don’t they have a problem with fascism. Their only issue is that they want you to be the fascists. How can you not see how a civil society cannot exist if we follow your ideology? It’s fine as long as it happens to people you disagree with politically. Idiocy.

      3 replies →

Moral acceptance of petty theft always increases with inequality. When the poor take from the rich, people don't care as much. The poorer the thief and the richer the victim, the less people care. Go far enough, and people view the thief as a Robin Hood-style hero.

Given that we're at a point in American history where inequality is quite extreme, I don't think it's fair to compare shoplifting to the corruption of the ruling class that is largely responsible for the current levels of inequality in the first place.

To be quite frank, under current conditions, it is a moral failure to see fault with impoverished people for stealing what they need to survive, not the other way around.

  • To be clear the shoplifters in question are all rich themselves and stealing expensive items they don’t need. The original article is about students at one of the richest and most prestigious institutions in the country. None of the criminals are poor by any stretch of the imagination. They are just lousy people who are smart enough and entitled enough to try to justify their bad behavior.

  • What? It's a moral failure to have an issue with people shoplifting from Walgreens? Do you think they're stealing milk, eggs, and bread?

    • And your types are the same that would see a cashier who steals $100 go to jail....

      But a manager who edits timecards of 10 people for $100 ($1000 damage) is just a civil matter.

      Crime, and who punishes it, has always been a political matter. The crimes have never been equal for those with power other others.

      1 reply →

Moral code is downstream from culture and not every culture sees cheating as a moral failing.

As Princeton's demo skewed hard into a more international student body, the underlying cultural assumptions have shifted.

The Christian extension of the Ninth Commandment from not bearing false witness to a blanket ban on lying is unique. Islam has explicit exceptions through Taqiyya, Hinduism gets nuanced with dharma and adharma, Buddhism sees it as one of the ten unwholesome actions, ...

WASPs built and defined Princeton, but that is long over.

  • It is rather disappointing to see a take as unsubtle as "white people are pure and honest God-fearing Christians and Asians are dirty heathens with no concept of morality" on this site.

    • No, it is culture, not race. A friend of mine (half asian, half white) and by happenstance devot christian got his graduate degree at a top 3 school in the US, and he was shocked the international student brazenness in cheating. He reported it and it was brushed under the rug, and this severely disillusioned my friend. Every professor I know reports this cultural difference.

      And obviously we see it with SDE interivews with 1point3acres and the other "interview study" sites and AI tools.

      2 replies →

    • My feeling is people in west extrapolate asian within group variations into whole. Rich international students who invest in western degrees as pay-to-win not representative / sampling bias vs whole. Reality is international students pay for degree, university accommodates, lack of language proficiency = they'll visibly "cheat" more (i.e. patch writing) to get what's theirs, but those conditions to specific subculture/cohort. Broad statistically show western institutions has like 15-50% plagiarism/cheating rates, most of which just get swept under rug because academic misconduct not elevated officially to keep misconduct stats at ~1%. For reference PRC plagiarism data (CNKI / big data audit used to sweep through tertiary thesis) was like ~10%.

      I suppose one conclusion is academically inclined East Asians cheat less in aggregate... because broadly you can't cheat national examinations (yes there are very elaborate cheating rings, but this should only reinforce it's not easy / trivial). The ones who buys academic performance, i.e. dummies who can't hack PRC tertiary and has to go western tertiary (including Ivys) cheat more than baseline. But broadly west cheats more... but institutions minimize misconduct stats because incentivized to cover/underreport/juke stats to protect brand.

    • It’s more commonly posted here these days, but this has always been on this site. Just usually couched “better”

    • Nobody said that. Yes, Princeton was founded by Presbyterians and that was a huge influence on ethical norms there. But most of the white people at Princeton aren't Calvinists either, and any that are would tell you that literally nobody is pure and honest.

    • Do you have any data to support your disappointment? There seems to be data supporting the GP's observation, which is different than your crude strawman.

      It's not unreasonable to look for fire when you smell smoke.

      "A 2016 study of more than 100 UK universities by The Times found that non-EU students were four times more likely to be caught cheating than UK and EU students. In the US, they were found to be five times as likely to be caught cheating than their local peers, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of data from 14 leading US colleges." https://studyinternational.com/news/the-complex-problem-of-a...

      "Public universities in the U.S. recorded 5.1 reports of alleged cheating for every 100 international students, versus one report per 100 domestic students, in a Wall Street Journal analysis" https://www.wsj.com/articles/foreign-students-seen-cheating-...

      In 2015, 4,540 international students were enrolled at Iowa. Of those, 2,797 were from China. That’s 9 percent of the school’s student body. Most or all of the students accused of cheating are Chinese nationals. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/college-...

      1 reply →

    • That is not what I wrote - there was no judgement, just that other cultures weigh cheating morally different.

      It is all moralities. There is no absolute one.

> in some left-wing corners of the commentariat, is out; flagrant disregard of the social contract is in.

Interesting that this is posed as the American left disregarding the social contract. I think you could make a pretty good case that the American right disregarded the social contract first in electing an extremely destructive pedophile who starts wars for reasons that can't even be articulated, pardons war criminals, engages in blatant nepotism enriching his family to the tune of billions at taxpayer's expense, large-scale fraud including being convicted of felony, adjudicated rapist, and a list of social contract violations going on for about 300 more pages that I'd be here all day typing out. And once the social contract is gone, it would be pretty weird to expect the other side to continue abiding by the terms. I don't personally make a habit of binding myself to one-sided contracts that impose no obligations on the other party.

  • >Interesting that this is posed as the American left disregarding the social contract.

    Yeah no kidding, where's the commentary on the "right-wing corners" that are rolling coal, "owning the libs", storming the Capitol, denying vaccine science and refusing to wear masks during a pandemic etc., and the consideration of whether this posture is a frustrated response to that.

    • Also the right wing love to ignore every single bit of their own crimes.

      It's like the idea that those that voted for Trump have never committed misdemeanors cannot even be discussed, when the actual crime statistics show that yea, they are just as apt to load up the steaks and walk out of the store.

      But I will say they've done a damned good job controlling the conversation so it's not brought up in the first place.

  • Is this an announcement of engaging in these behaviors?

    What will change once you no longer feel bound to this contract?

    • To be clear, I do not live in America. Not every place in the world has wantonly abandoned the social contract.

      Everything changes when people no longer feel bound to it, so it's an outcome you should rather desire to avoid. Some examples are the shoplifting mentioned in the article, Luigi Mangione, or the guy who threw molotovs at Altman's mansion. The justice system is a mutual agreement to forsake violence owing to the belief that conflicts and grievances can be mediated in a peaceful manner. If that belief dies, if people believe the justice system and government can not be trusted to deliver justice to violators of the social contract and compensation to the wronged, then people will take matters into their own hands by any means necessary. It is not a pretty state of affairs, but perhaps the people who initially disregarded the contract might've considered that before disposing of it.

      1 reply →