not to mention all the progress traps capitalism stepped into

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 51 points 2 months ago (4 children)

The planet won't die, but we will

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Not a fan of comments like this because it ignores all of the species that we are taking with us. Sure the planet will bounce back eventually but we really fucked the ever loving shit out of it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    Even if humanity doesn't go extinct, we are one of earth's big extinction events. If anything it could be argued that humanity being wiped out would save more species in the long run.

    To e clear I don't disagree with you, I just don't see the point in enshrining species alive now as the most deserving over potential species in the future simply because they have emotional value to humans that will be dead.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 38 points 2 months ago

    Who knew that you could turn an entire planet into a gas chamber?

    Venus.

  • source
  • [–] 30 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    Okay but why does the picture look like someone put their phone on a flatbed scanner

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 2 months ago

    Let's be fair, we've made plenty of species extinct just for the love of the game.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (18 children)

    It’s not capitalism per se. It’s the lazy, stupid populace that allows the system of regulatory capture we have.

    The fossil fuel industry also gets a metric fuck ton of tax payer funded subsidies. That’s not capitalism. That’s a quasi state economy.

    In a true capitalist system, we’d see more competitive forms of energy taking off, like solar and wind which are cheaper than fossil fuels at this point. But because the government keeps fossil fuels going, we’re not getting off them.

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I think it's inevitable of any human system that it eventually is undermined by greed and selfishness. Some systems are just more prone to it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 4 points 2 months ago (14 children)

    Genuine question. how are the voters supposed to keep their leaders accountable?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (12 children)

    By voting. The US has set term lengths at every level. If the leaders are not fulfilling their job properly, they get fired.

    For representatives it’s every two years.

    That requires having an informed and active constituency though, which we do not have.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    And it will never happen because the people who control the resources also control the narrative. They promote their candidates, who change the laws in their favour, and progressively make things worse for your average person.

    The system you describe is a pipe dream, and it's a nice dream, but it's not reflective of the world we live in today.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 9 points 2 months ago

    the fossil gas problem is only about 50 years old. before that, levels were increasing but still manageable. carbon taxes were designed to be a solution compatible with capitalism

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago

    200 species a day!

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago*

    Capitalism only works when there's a big bad Soviet state that they have to compete against in a popularity contest in the global stage, and if they go mask-off it scares all the fence sitting nations into communism.

    If 2008 had happens in 1968 everyone involved would have been tried as Soviet saboteurs or something in a big red scare purge. "Using capitalism against itself" or something....

    Not to say anhydrous communism is the solution either. I think the answer lies somewhere in the middle of ⅔ communism for natural monopolies and necessities, and ⅓ capitalism for luxury goods and comoddities in purely elastic markets.

    A tank of gas and a TV cost the same amount of money because competition legitimately worked for the TV, and fucking didn't for the gasoline 🤣

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago

    It's hard to know if the world would still suck the same under a different system.

    But I agree lol

  • source
  • unregulated captialism..

    it wasn't always unregulated.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    "Why...there oughta be a law!" /s

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago

    There oughta be enforced laws. There’s plenty of laws, just rich people have enough lawyers that they make prosecution onerous. Nobody has the balls to cut through the bullshit because rich people will apply all kinds of pressure to a system that has become more and more vulnerable to the pressures wealth can exert.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    To be fair, what we have in most of the world isn’t actually raw/pure capitalism, most of the time called Laissez-faire capitalism. Most of the world has a mixed economy of different capitalism implantations across the board in different areas: state/regulated/corporate capitalism and best of all crony capitalism.

    Regulated capitalism may actually work if we regulated it fairly and didn’t have megacorps writing the laws. But I don’t have that much faith in human nature to not keep fucking it up like we’ve done so many times.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago

    Regulated capitalism may actually work if we regulated it fairly and didn’t have megacorps writing the laws.

    Here's the thing....that's true for literally every form of governance/economic planning you can conceive.

    The problem with {socialism|capitalism|communism|anarchism} will always be "the ones with all the {de facto|de jure} power".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago*

    I'd go one further and note that environmentalism isn't exactly endemic outside the capitalist sphere of influence. The USSR was dirty af. Chinese Communists were openly antagonistic to environmental movements until the early '00s, when air quality in Beijing got so bad that the national leadership was forced to reconcile with it.

    The real virtue of socialist policy is in it's ability to adapt democratically, while capitalists are bound up in authoritarian modes of production. But if the public at-large doesn't see the benefit of a good policy, there's nothing inherent to the mode of production that makes it cleaner.

    Regulated capitalism may actually work if we regulated it fairly and didn’t have megacorps writing the laws.

    Regulated capitalism is just a tiger by the tail. As soon as you lose you grip, it eats you.

    The only way to keep mega-corps from writing policy is to abolish them. Otherwise, why wouldn't wealthy people try to beg, browbeat, or business plot a state government?

    At some point, you need to eliminate the bourgeois class entirely. It's us or them, over a long enough timeline.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    It's extinct species per minute not year, there are a lot of unique species most of them still undiscovered going extinct.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    How will we prove that we're the pointy end of the food chain of we don't completely destroy everything below us?

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›