[–] 2 points 13 hours ago* (1 child)

And that’s ultimately the concern I have with the United States: not capitalism itself, but what happens when concentrated economic power becomes sufficiently influential that it begins to undermine the democratic mechanisms that are supposed to regulate it.

This is the inevitable conclusion of capitalism. People who support capitalism are like that crazy guy who lived with bears. It doesn't have a happy ending no matter how good it is to have cute bear pets.

For example, Glass Steagall was an important regulation that capitalism eventually removed from itself through the capture of the government by the 1%. This is not a solvable flaw. The best you can do is make end stage capitalism your child/grandchild's problem. It isnt very nice of you to treat your future decendants like this IMO.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 3 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

    When you artificially limit the number of political parties to two, people are forced into voting against things, rather then for them.

    Also it limits heavily the competition in the electoral system, which leads to incredibly weak leadership and a stagnation of new ideas and people.

    Replacing First-past-the-post voting with a more representative voting system would give voters the freedom to transfer their vote if their preference doesn't win. No spoiler effect

    This keeps the feet of larger political parties in the fire, lest they are replaced with more representative political parties.

    But this was all stuff that should have happened decades ago. The horses have escaped the stable and the barn is on fire. None the less, this is all something to keep in mind when new countries are formed out of the ashes of what was.

    Strap up and stay frosty out there strangers. Peace.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 3 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

    I would probably try out heroin. Been saving it for the end because if I need painkillers for health reasons, they would be more effective.

    But that is assuming an apocalypse means collapse of "civilization". Imagine if you were a 1%er, and you had all the power and wealth in the world. wouldn't losing all that unearned power be an apocalypse for you, even though it would make everyone's lives better?

    One person's apocalypse could very well be everyone's salvation.

  • source
  • view more: next ›