Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Discussion Forum' started by KanadaRiots, Aug 11, 2019.
I forgot to delete the is out my bad lol
Capitalism will save us all. Worry not.
Bet your tiny nuts communism won't do.
This video is so lofty. Gish gallop using sources mostly in French.
The biggest revelation being that eventually this giant space rock with finite resources is going to run out soon. How soon? Who knows. It could be millions of years from now. It could be tomorrow. The video certainly doesn't know but he has a really nice microphone so who cares.
Anyone who thinks this video is profound are just doomsday preppers hoping their investment on a fucking bunker in Montana pays off.
Many scientists, from biologists, to entomologist, oceanologists and phytologist warn us that the collapse of our eco system is imminent. They all conducted studies and measured the biodiversity of their respective fields and came to the conclusion that we're loosing many species at an accelerating rate.
Where are looking here at issues far beyond the climate crisis which is only an effect not a cause. This is not a typical doomsday talk or the belief in apocalyptic events which every society has in some form. We're looking at radical changes to the environment of the planet and a destruction like never seen before in the last few million years. Take Brazil for example where under Bolsonaro they started to increase the destruction of the rain forest. I quote, the Brazilian space research agency INPE reported at the beginning of July that 88 percent more fell in June compared to a year ago.
If we continue on this path the next decades will be marked of very severe disruptions to our civilisation.
Becasuse communism is known for it's protection of the environment.
Humans in general don't take care of the environment. Not defending socialism/communism but capitalism would encourage aggressive resource usage for short term gains.
Not like any system we have is actually going to solve our problems or that we use either one of the previously mentioned ones in a pure sense though.
Bully check out the opinions of this malformed abomination.
It's kinda funny how any criticism on the current events we experience and the system we have is meet with "Bu .. buuut ... Communism!".
I didn't even mention it here nor do I suggested that it's a viable solution. Besides neither communism nor socialism plays any real role anymore since the early 1990s and the collapse of the Soviet Union. Hell even China is today more into capitalism, financial Investments and market economies than the United States when you look at it.
All I am saying is, what is this system we have right now and the supposed wealth worth when it's pretty much destroying the environment so severely that it will eventually collapse in a few decades from now? Most people who are in their 20s and 30s right now should really consider what will be in 40 or 50 years from now. It's really like some here argue they want to party hard every day with all kinds of drugs and not give up anything of it, because it's their lifestyle, yet they think you're crazy if you even mention something like a possible hangover and side effects and that maybe some changes should be made.
Look! Another one of those damn communists ...
Criticisms of capitalism don't imply endorsement of communism.
This isn't black and white. No blanket is going to fix what we have.
Well ... in the meantime:
Trump overhauls enforcement of Endangered Species Act. Critics predict more extinctions
Under the enforcement changes, officials for the first time will be able to publicly attach a cost to saving an animal or plant. Blanket protections for creatures newly listed as threatened will be removed. Among several other changes, the action could allow the government to disregard the possible impact of climate change, which conservation groups call a major and growing threat to wildlife.
But Brett Hartl, a government affairs director for the Center for Biological Diversity conservation group, contended any such price tag would be inflated, and “an invitation for political interference” in the decision whether to save a species.
“You have to be really naive and cynical and disingenuous to pretend” otherwise, Hartl said. “That’s the reason that Congress way back ... prohibited the Service from doing that,” he said. “It’s a science question: Is a species going extinct, yes or no?”
We are loosing more species than ever before in human history, but ... we simply can not go and issue a blank protection on them anymore as we have to protect our economies first.
Can you prove this happened? History is meaningless and written by the victors.
Socialists make water disappear.
The water is being funneled _today as we speak_ to irrigate cotton fields in the Fergana valley. Today. No socialism today. It´s capitalism, it´s DEMAND, it´s textile industry. NOW, TODAY.
Or, sure, it´s pre 90s commies making water disappear.
Yeah I think we really do not have to discuss the fact that many socialist regimes didn't give a fuck about the environment either, leave alone people. I mean in all seriousness and as much as I am a leftist, but this is one of the points where I can not say that it's too different. In many cases probably even worse due to the fact that they have been dictatorship. Maybe the motivation was a different one. Where as in a free market society the goal was to make profits in socialist dictatorships they wanted to push for a revolution and industrialisation as fast as possible, no matter what it would do to the environment or the people. But to be fair here, neither in the East nor the West so to speak was there a real consideration that natural resources could be ever really depleted. Since the 18th and 19th century nature was treated like it was inexhaustible. In other words, everyone made that mistake back then. One can read more about the environmental policy in the Soviet Union here:
But today, or more accurately for the last 50-60 years or so, we have the science and knowledge and the warnings are more clear than ever before but we're not acting or really doing anything. So yeah. We're fucked.
Aggressively not giving a fuck about environment and people happens under both capitalism and communism. It's just that communism is mostly present as an oppressive regime, and can thus more easily not give a shit about its own people and environment, while capitalism usually has to relegate the no-shits-given into the Third World.
Capitalism can be also present in dictatorships.
And historically it was also present for most of it's life in autocratic regimes and not actually as part of democratic governments and societies.
I was more talking about the democratic west and its form of capitalism.
Yes I am aware of that. But historically speaking that's only really a relatively short time period we're looking at here and I think we're oversimplifying it by doing that. You said, I quote "(...)while capitalism usually has to relegate the no-shits-given into the Third World." which makes it sound like it's an inherent part of capitalism or like there is a good and bad side of capitalism or something but we see this also happening in democracies and western societies when ever there is a chance for it. Water Pollution in Flynt, the Hambacher Forrest in Germany and so on. When ever we don't have some form of checks and balances this is what happens.
I am not saying you're doing this but it's common these days to equated capitalism with democracy and liberty or to describe capitalism as an inherently good thing and we're simply experiencing this so called vulture capitalism or what ever.
Trough most of it's history capitalism was not beneficial for the majority of the population and any social improvement and redistribution of wealth had to be achieved quite often trough bloody fighting, revolts, strikes and political reforms. Particularly the beginning of the industrial revolution saw many technological changes and innovations like the steam engine but maybe 80% of the population had no real advantage from it when you look at the terrible conditions most workers endured with child labour and working 16 hours 6 days per week in coal mines and as steel workers. The situations for workers got often so bad some even starved to death causing local uprisings like the various Weavers' Uprising in Germany.
Let's put it this way: Lake Karachay and similar blatant voids of shits given could happen because the oppressive regime allowed it, putting the needs of itself over the wellbeing of the people. In capitalism, at least the one in the western world, governments usually at least pretend to put the wellbeing of the people above profit to some degree. Of course, you have quite some shady shit like Flint, Michigan happening especially in the US, but in general, there is a slightly higher value put on human life. Human life in close proximity, that is, because there is absolutely nothing to stop them from exploiting the shit out of Third World countries.
I said "USUALLY", which absolutely does not imply that it's inherent or anything, just that it's less common due to the difference in power structure. If companies doing shady shit are privately owned and at least somewhat accountable towards the state as a representative of the people, it's somewhat different than a company being owned by the state, and only being liable to fullfill the next Five Year Plan, and all damages being covered up by the same state that owns the company to cover its own ass.
Again, that's the ideal version, but obviously it's not as clear cut as that.
The point of all this is simply that hardcore exploitation of the populace is usually easier in an oppressive regime, which shouldn't be a very contentious statement.
Well, it also shouldn't be a contentious statement that the various iterations of totally-not-communist states were more oppressive regimes than the post-war western countries, but apparently that is a problematic thing to say?
That's mostly true for today yes because we had a very long and difficult history of social improvements happening. But when you look at America trough out the 1900 I would say the picture is not so clear anymore. The difference here between the socialist states and western nations in terms of environmental and human protection was not so vastly different. We are talking about the US a democratic nation no less which used foreign workers in a way that was barely better than slavery. The death toll among chinse workers in the rail way system for example. We can also see many historic examples of uprisings in the United States due to poor conditions. Like the WW1 veterans which build camps in Washington as protest because the government didn't pay them correctly it ended up with the government sending the military in to clear the camps with force leading to some deaths. The whole 20s and 30s saw also a kind of corruption in society that we can't even imagine. All of the regulations we have in place today and this "at least they are pretending to give a shit" is coming from somewhere after all.