870
Technology Connections - You are being misled about renewable energy technology. (www.youtube.com)
submitted 7 months ago by to c/solarpunk@slrpnk.net
176 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Amazing video by Technology Connections. It's a long one, but don't miss his 30 minute angry rant at the end.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 7 months ago* (10 children)

I do not understand what this adds to the concept of capitalism other than introducing the term "social darwinism".

There is no difference between "the aesthetics" of capitalism and its actualization, and neither base a capitalist's actions in regard to benefitting society beyond "the market". Capitalism is simply the current method of accruing power for someone to push their personal ideology on others. It just happens that the most effective method to exploit capitalism is to reject any sense of empathy or consideration for anything external or internal, especially flesh and blood humans because they are the only real threat to your power.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (7 children)

    Let me try to rephrase this, so that maybe it makes sense. The point I'm trying to make is that social-darwinism is not an extension of capitalism, they're two different things but with aesthetic overlap.

    Capitalism aims to optimize work, by naturally rejecting inefficient ways to do things. The production line wins over the workshop. It's about things and processes, not about people directly.

    Social-darwinism is about rejecting people. To refuse people the space to thrive or reproduce. To push them to the edge of society until they die from exposure or suicide or simply that their bloodline ends when they can't support their families over the course of generations. Thus the noble classes dominate by right, and whoever is unsuccessful deserves to die and rot.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago* (6 children)

    I see no point in making a differentiation between mechanism and the methodology to which that mechanism enables the most exploit.

    I disagree with your thought that capitalism optimizes work. It either ensures work is done many times over in parallel (competition) or arbitrarily based on the whims of the owner class (olig/monopoly), and that alternative/more efficient means are snuffed out where a more profitable option exists. It's an unstable and inefficient system that relies on civil expenditure (bail outs, infrastructure, etc) to function.

    The capitalist system that requires you labor to for food and shelter is exactly the same mechanism that rejects people, pushes them out, exposes them, and props up the wealthy class. Your "Social Darwinism" is a fundamental consequence capitalism, not an unrelated ideology that just happens to exist simultaneously. Capitalism drives people to do [more] evil. Then they rationalize their behavior to protect their ego and power.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (5 children)

    I'm not making the claim that capitalism optimizes work, it's the claim that liberals make. I think it's important to actually study and understand what other people believe, and as I stated before the idea of capitalism does not allow destruction or monopolization of natural resources, or to block others from using natural resources in a responsible manner (which was the core problem with feudalism).

    The point is that billionaires are not liberals, and they don't believe in capitalism.

    I'm not arguing whether capitalism is a flawed theory of economics which naturally leads to either fascism, social darwinism, or some third thing. I'm arguing that billionaires actually do believe in social darwinism, which is a different thing than liberalism or capitalism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (4 children)

    I think you're conflating liberalism with capitalism, which isn't really accurate.

    Capitalism can exist without liberalism, and this does lead into fascism, but that's still capitalism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (3 children)

    No, I'm literally giving examples of how Adam Smith defined the foundations of capitalism, which both liberals and so-called conservatives normally favor as their preferred economic theory, and how these foundations contrast with a different philosophy favored by different people.

    Anyway, I'm done beating a dead horse here.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (2 children)

    Adam Smith didn't invent capitalism. It's not a philosophy, it was an economic system that emerged from certain material relations. Liberalism, and fascism, are just two of the ideological frameworks that can reproduce capitalism's material base and both of which emerge from the material base of capitalism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    Ah, I see, I guess we don't have to consider what liberals think and how they view the world, because after all we possess the objective truth and their opinions don't matter.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago*

    We don't have to consider capitalism to have some kind of doctrine Orthodoxy, as if Adam Smith was a prophet and that deviations from liberalism aren't capitalist. It's still capitalism even if it isn't what Adam Smith envisioned.

    Billionaires believe in capitalism, even if they don't believe in liberalism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent