Hi all,

I’m seeing a lot of hate for capitalism here, and I’m wondering why that is and what the rationale behind it is. I’m pretty pro-capitalism myself, so I want to see the logic on the other side of the fence.

If this isn’t the right forum for a political/economic discussion-- I’m happy to take this somewhere else.

Cheers!

  • o_oOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    1 year ago

    First, no alternative is required for something to be unacceptable to continue

    Yes there is! This system is at least feeding most people in most countries. I refuse to say that “because this system is not ideal, we must destroy the system which is feeding billions of people without an alternative in mind”. Are you arguing that it should be okay for people to die?!?

    • TheFutureIsDelaware@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It has to be okay for people to die, because ALL PATHS FORWARD INVOLVE PEOPLE DYING. Any choice you make involves some hidden choice about who gets to suffer and die and who doesn’t.

      But no, that’s not what I was saying. Also, are you aware that extinction also involves lots of deaths? Have you thought about what does and doesn’t count as “death” to you? What about responsibility for that death? How indirect does it have to be before you’re free from responsibility? Is it better to have fewer sentient beings living better lives, or more beings living worse lives? Does it matter how much worse? Is there a line where their life becomes a net positive in terms of its contribution to the overall “goodness” of the state of the universe? Once we can ensure a net positive life for people should the goal to be for as many to exist as possible? Should new people only be brought into the world if we can guarantee them a net positive life?

      But hey, thanks for the very concrete example of how being in a decent local minima is very hard to break out of.