Thread by @AlexandraErin

A lot of firings and evictions are 100% illegal - the problem is that the person doing them has a law firm on retainer and it takes nothing from their daily life to defend themselves, while the victim has to fight a battle they didn't prepare for while in tenuous circumstances.

The principle of "innocent until proven guilty" is important but the way things are structured means it makes landlords innocent of illegal evictions, not tenants innocent of evictable breaches. It shields employers from discrimination charges, not employees from firings.

We have laws that shield tenants and laws that shield employees from unfair and discriminatory practices, but deploying them means leveling an accusation, which puts the burden on the one making the complaint.

Do I think all firings and evictions and other commercial actions should fall under the umbrella of legal actions? No. But the principles which we deem to be *just* in the realm of government ought to be enshrined in our society.

Increasingly, we as private citizens are at the mercy of the wealthy and powerful in ways we just can't opt out of, not and participate in society or even survive.

As our supposedly unalienable human rights are interpreted as not applying, the result must be feudalism.

It doesn't matter how many no steppo snake flags we wave in the face of government tyranny if we tolerate free market oligarchy to set the rules we live by.

Even if the boot stepping on your face has a designer label on it, it's still fascism.

"But if landlords had no ability to evict tenants without proving their case, renting apartments would be so unprofitable no one would do it."

Oh well. I guess we're nationalizing apartments.

I mean, I don't necessarily think that's true.

But if it's true?

Giant public housing initiative. Government buys anyone who wants out of their "unprofitable" apartment buildings. Housing becomes a human right.