Flippanarchy

Is it ethical to make enough food to feed everyone but then throw it away just because of capitalism?

"But until the sage is dead, great thieves will never cease to appear, and if you pile on more sages in hopes of bringing the world to order, you will only be piling up more profit for Robber Chih. Fashion pecks and bushels for people to measure by and they will steal by peck and bushel.5 Fashion scales and balances for people to weigh by and they will steal by scale and balance. Fashion tallies and seals to insure trustworthiness and people will steal with tallies and seals. Fashion benevolence and righteousness to reform people and they will steal with benevolence and righteousness. How do I know this is so? He who steals a belt buckle pays with his life; he who steals a state gets to be a feudal lord-and we all know that benevolence and righteousness are to be found at the gates of the feudal lords. Is this not a case of stealing benevolence and righteousness and the wisdom of the sages?" Chapter 10 of Zhuangzi (Stolen Chests), Burton Watson translation.

The reason is because these questions are often aimed at dirt poor people, not at the rich. The rich are, despite being rich, often the single most stingy, thieving bunch in existence. If you leave a bowl of candy for everyone to take from, a few might take more than their share... but the rich will want to grab massive handfuls.

Because ethics don't exist as far as the ones hoarding bread in this scenario are concerned.

And because you following ethics is directly beneficial for them. As long as you act 'ethically', they remain at the top and nothing can be done about it.

Because one of these has a clear answer

Because ethics questions love focusing on individual choices, not the systems causing the problem in the first place.

we should be making sure no one goes hungry. but the answer to op's question is that the second hypothetical isn't interesting (obviously it's not ethical to hoard bread) and ethical questions are made to spark debate

Because in our (western) society, boldness and greed are universally honored to the point that corporations are generally seen as a means to enrich their owner rather than society as a whole. If you can afford it, and it's not explicitly outlawed, it's ethically right.

It is never unethical to steal food. It is unethical to stop someone from stealing food, or report someone for stealing food, or to arrest someone for stealing food.

Edit: ITT, sociopaths thinking their rationalizations for denying food to people are moral. It is NEVER unethical to steal food, got it? If someone is stealing food, it's because they're hungry, and they can't afford it. If you question that, you're just an asshole.

This actually highlights an important distinction in meta ethics (ethics about how to determine ethics). There is a divide amongst philosophers of what makes sense in pure analytical logic, and what makes sense in contextual reasoning. This divide is also shown to come up in "continental" vs "English speaking" philosophies. The two approach how to examine not just ethics, but truth overall in very different ways. I personally am of the belief that there needs to be an integration of these two in order for ethics to properly work, but to summarize this already too long Lemmy comment into one idea: fuck hoarding value of any kind.

As if 80% of western philosophy was written by well off people who sometimes owned slaves.

For a serious answer, because ethics is concerned with self. You already know the answer to the second question and will very likely never be in that situation. You do not know the answer to the first and have a much higher likelihood of being in that situation.

Read a recent poll that said 63% of U.S. adults believe that extreme wealth is not a moral issue. Only 18% think it's morally wrong. Sad. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2026/03/19/appendix-detailed-tables-us-morality/

Because it’s easier to question the desperate than the powerful… flips the whole perspective when you think about it.

Is it ethical to hoard land when families would willingly farm that land to grow food for themselves? Same question with housing - I am capable of building a small structure to live in perfectly happily but its illegal. Not a builder so the best I could do would likely just be a bit better than van living, but I could do it if it wasn't illegal.

I don’t mind stealing bread from the mouths of decadents.

Systematically answering "Is hoarding bread unethical" with "No" should result in the other questions being irrelevant.

Bread should be free. We already have enough for everyone. No one has to starve anymore, scarcity is a LIE.

The actual answer is that in western culture, it's generally taken as a given that stealing is wrong. It's in the 10 commandments.

"Hoarding" doesn't hold the same position in western mythos.

Applying pressure to an assumed moral certainty (thou shalt not steal) is fundamentally interesting. Applying pressure to a position where people don't hold culturally ethical baggage (hoarding) is much less so.