- cross-posted to:
- showerthoughts@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- showerthoughts@lemmy.world
There’s clearly a lean to the left side of things in Lemmy instances, with many people attacking people at the right.
In some cases regarding the climate crisis, there’s people blaming it on capitalism while hinting that communism/socialism are the solution to the climate crisis, because somehow having the state controlling the entire economy will lead to stop CO2 emissions.
A bit from the article:
The best way to protect the environment is to get rich. That way, there is enough money not only to meet the needs of ordinary people, but also to pay for cleaner power plants and better water-treatment facilities. Since capitalism is the best way to create wealth, humanity should stick with it.
Not the first time I’ve heard about this concept, and the more i look into the world the more I agree with it. Being green is kind of a luxury that not many people can afford, and the poorer people are the less they can afford green technology.
What do you think is the mechanism by which “undeveloped” countries become “developed” countries rofl
I’ll give you a hint, it starts with “CAPITAL” and there’s an “-ism” at the end.
There have been empires that didn’t rely on capitalism and were successful. Comparing a country with no infrastructure to one that does and saying it’s only because of capital is not how logic works. I had a headache one day due to a hangover, your logic dictates if someone else has a headache, it must be due to a hangover. That’s fucking idiocy and you should feel bad for thinking it.
Ok, explain to me how mercantilism and feudalism is better than capitalism
Not that either is even feasible nowadays but I’ll entertain it.
Did I say those are better?
The empires you reference were built on those two systems
I’m saying comparing capitalism to the lack of a system is not a fair comparison. Read better.
What would be a fair comparison? I’ve compared capitalism to the lack of a system, which leads to miserable poverty and short life spans. I’ve compared capitalism to other highly successful systems, which lead to even worse inequality and oppression.
Do you not understand what the point being proven is or what you’re trying to pick a part? The claim is capitalism makes the average joe richer. But there’s no baseline where that makes sense as there’s no such thing as a baseline. Everything is relative. It’s claim is in response to another claim of how it treats poor people. There’s immense data that poor are getting poorer. The wealth is undeniably concentrating into a smaller group than before. This is objective fact. You can’t start pulling out relative comparisons to try and disprove an objective observation of capitalism. Many of the benefits of capitalism are even at play with socialism. I’m not talking about a specific flavor of socialism either, but just straight up, people getting the full value of their work. You can’t tell me wealthy people skimming the top of off other folks work is somehow good for these people. It’s usually done by poor people who’ve accepted the lie.thst the problem isn’t with the wealthy, but other people in their own class or shitty business owners who fancy themselves economical experts but will never achieve the level of wealth they’ve been convinced to defend by the truly wealthy people.
So, tldr, I was pointing out comparisons aren’t actually useful and why it’s likely wrong, but sure, continue trying to make comparisons in the face of that. So to be clear, the comparisons don’t work because it’s not comparing things that make sense. So just stop it. It’s like arguing with a fifth grader.