you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 3 hours ago (2 children)
  • [–] 3 points 35 minutes ago (1 child)

    Sort of a famous counter-example.

    A seventy year long break from capitalist economic practices over half of Europe and most of Asia seems like it should have produced a noticeably different set of ecological outcomes.

    But industrialization appears to take the same ecological toll from Beijing to Belgrade.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 minutes ago (1 child)

    when will that 70 year long break happen

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 minutes ago*

    It already happened, in the early 90s, when Yeltsin rode a tank up to the Moscow Parliament and started shelling it.

    The USSR latest from 1922 to 1991, give or take a few years depending on how you want to count it.

    Dengism, in China, kicked off in earnest at about the same time (Tianamen Square was largely a Maoist reaction to capitalist land reforms).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

    Because I believe ecological sustainability is achivable under any economic system!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 44 minutes ago (1 child)

    Capitalism requires continuous and unlimited economic growth. Economic growth requires accelerated resource extraction. Capitalism is not ecologically sustainable by design.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 36 minutes ago* (last edited 25 minutes ago) (1 child)

    Capitalism, like socialism, means many things to many different people. At it's core capitalism is simply a philosophy built around the idea of the free exchange of goods and services between individuals. I don't think most people would that infinite growth is an essential part of that equation as there are real examples of capitalistic economys that shrink every year.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 22 minutes ago

    Where are those capitalist "economies" that don't require growth? Are they decoupled, and not relying on the growth of the global economy? Does their pension system not explode if economic growth would come to a halt? If so, what makes them capitalist?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 39 minutes ago* (1 child)

    So you brought up a part of the current system with it failing?

    Capitalisms faiilures on multiple cornerstones, in addition to ecology, are broadly documented. You're allowed to update a belief with knowledge

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 32 minutes ago (1 child)

    I think our ecological failures are often misattributed to economic philosophy. Collectivist societies have also caused irreparable ecological harm in the past, so the issue can't be capitalism exclusive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments