That is not apples to apples. One is scientific and an opinion on our effect on this living breathing rock. The other is objectively correct. Capitalism is everywhere. In varying degrees and control.
Capitalism is everywhere. So are our efforts to destroy our ecosystem. Changing it at this point seems unrealistic. I mean, you could make this point, but it is indeed defeatist. But to be fair, on short term I would also pick severely limiting and controlling capitalism over a sudden revolution. As a start, let’s get rid of billionaires. That would help making any change further down the road, because there won’t be a class of people with incredible power that will try to prevent any change.
It’s not defeatist to say the sky is blue and we breath oxygen but we need to optimize keeping the sky blue and the right amount of oxygen. Would I be ok with an alternative? Absolutely. But I don’t see one and I am asking all that object my observation to present a viable alternative.
We don’t have an alternative for oxygen. Our biology requires it. It is unrealistic to think we could do without, it’s science fiction. Capitalism is not something that exists outside of the human mind. Changing something that exists only in the human mind is of course very possible. It exists only in as far as we believe in it. If we would no longer believe in it, it would seize to exist. We could go for anarchy as an alternative. Or communism. But perhaps these too are the old ways, and we need new ones. New fictions to believe in because we’re confronted with new challanges. Believing in capitalism has brought us to destroy our habitats. If we’d simply think 'The whole world is capitalist. Changing it at this point seems unrealistic", that is indeed a very defeatis attitude. That is not to say that I have the alternative ready. I’m saying in this new time we shouldn’t stick to old dogma, believing it is the only way.
This is a bit defeatist, wouldn’t you agree? A lot of people use the same argument to fight against climate protection actions
That is not apples to apples. One is scientific and an opinion on our effect on this living breathing rock. The other is objectively correct. Capitalism is everywhere. In varying degrees and control.
Capitalism is everywhere. So are our efforts to destroy our ecosystem. Changing it at this point seems unrealistic. I mean, you could make this point, but it is indeed defeatist. But to be fair, on short term I would also pick severely limiting and controlling capitalism over a sudden revolution. As a start, let’s get rid of billionaires. That would help making any change further down the road, because there won’t be a class of people with incredible power that will try to prevent any change.
It’s not defeatist to say the sky is blue and we breath oxygen but we need to optimize keeping the sky blue and the right amount of oxygen. Would I be ok with an alternative? Absolutely. But I don’t see one and I am asking all that object my observation to present a viable alternative.
We don’t have an alternative for oxygen. Our biology requires it. It is unrealistic to think we could do without, it’s science fiction. Capitalism is not something that exists outside of the human mind. Changing something that exists only in the human mind is of course very possible. It exists only in as far as we believe in it. If we would no longer believe in it, it would seize to exist. We could go for anarchy as an alternative. Or communism. But perhaps these too are the old ways, and we need new ones. New fictions to believe in because we’re confronted with new challanges. Believing in capitalism has brought us to destroy our habitats. If we’d simply think 'The whole world is capitalist. Changing it at this point seems unrealistic", that is indeed a very defeatis attitude. That is not to say that I have the alternative ready. I’m saying in this new time we shouldn’t stick to old dogma, believing it is the only way.
“right amount of oxygen”…