Gregory's Server@Radical_EgoCom es ist schwierig diesen gänzlich zu stoppen.
Er muss reguliert werden, da er auch antreibt.
Er muss Umweltfreundlicher und sozialer werden. Weiter so, ist der falsche Weg.
|
Top-level
18 comments
@Radical_EgoCom auf der Cop29 gibt es keinen grünen Kapitalismus. @Radical_EgoCom Keine neue Palmölplantagen, dann macht der Kapitalismus etwas anderes, etwas umweltfreundlicheres. Die alternative zu Nutella zum Beispiel. Wenn kein Gewinn herausspringt, warum sollte man was ändern? I don't know why you seem to be so fixated on making sure the super rich stay super rich, but that is not my prerogative. I want to protect the environment and end social inequality, two things that capitalism is directly responsible for due to its prioritization of profit over the environment and human rights, a prioritization that stems from 1. The private ownership of the means of production, 2. Market Competition, and 3. The profit motive, three things that...1/2 ...I want replaced with collective ownership, a centrally planned economy, and social and environmental welfare. If that's the "extreme" that you think should be avoided, then I don't know what to tell you other than that's a weird thing to be against. 2/2 @Radical_EgoCom was du willst, hatten wir im kalten Krieg in Osteuropa. "Run-down countries, environmental pollution, it didn't matter, people, animals, nature." Your description fits America and many other capitalist countries. Both capitalist and socialist countries have had run-down living areas and plenty of pollution, unfortunately, but at least in socialist countries, they had free education and healthcare. 1/5 "[In the West] there was also pollution, but people had food and were free and traded." People starve in America all the time. If you think that America is a land of no starvation, then you've been told a lie about America. According to "Feeding America," More than 47 million people in the US face hunger, including 1 in 5 children: https://www.feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america 2/5 "Why not a bit of both?" Because that isn't liberation, which is my goal for the working class. I want full liberation for the working class, not "half liberation," not a compromise where the capitalist gets to oppress us a teeny bit, COMPLETE LIBERATION! 3/5 I don't think you want to make the rich richer. I never said that. What I think, based on what you've told me, is that you want to maintain the rich's wealth and power over the proletariat, i.e., "No revolution for the working class, you guys! Let's compromise with our oppressors, and maybe they'll be nicer to us if we try hard enough," which I've already explained why that is the worst thing for the working class to do. 4/5 I am radical, but not like capitalism, as you blatantly and incorrectly suggested. Capitalism is radical for the continued oppression and subjugation of the working class. I am radical for the opposite: the destruction of capitalist oppression and subjugation and the liberation of the working class. 5/5 You're talking as if you're completely disconnected from reality. Just watch the news or go online, and you'll see that the climate crisis and pollution are worse now than ever before. Whether that is because of capitalism or not is up for discussion (I'm of the opinion that it is), but pollution is objectively worse now under capitalism.https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/climate-issues/degrees-matter 1/4 And what is this nonsense you're speaking of about "a few people are starving?" A few people? Your definition of "a few" must be skewed. Does 733 million people (1 in 11) sound like "a few people to you? According to "Comcern Worldwide US," that's how many people go hungry every day. 9 million die from hunger every year, many being children under 5. https://concernusa.org/news/world-hunger-facts/#:~:text=The%20world%20produces%20enough%20food,11)%20go%20hungry%20every%20day. Also, you didn't prove that radicalism is always bad. Besides me not agreeing with 3 out of 4 of your examples (I don't think Islam or Christianity are okay even when not extreme, Communism has never been implemented, and I don't think every instance of socialism has been poorly executed) you presenting 4 examples of radicalism being bad doesn't prove that radicalism is always bad, only that those 4 examples are bad, which again, 3 out of 4 of which I don't agree with, 3/4 @Radical_EgoCom es hungern ein paar Menschen. @Radical_EgoCom check this out: https://www.bundesstiftung-aufarbeitung.de/de/recherche/dossiers/umweltverschmutzung-und-umweltbewegung-der-ddr#:~:text=Die%20Umweltverschmutzung%20nahm%20in%20der,stets%20wachsenden%20Bedarf%20an%20Ressourcen. Polution in Commies Time was more than in our site. Now we do some, but not enougth. |
@Sweetbee
This is a pipedream you're speaking of. Capitalism being difficult to stop doesn't mean we shouldn't try to stop it, and progress can also exist under socialism. It also sounds like you've fallen for the "Green Capitalism" lie of capitalism having the potential to become more "environmentally friendly and social." Just look up the recent COP29 meeting to see what "Green Capitalism" actually is, a farce that will never work because capitalism prioritizes profit over the environment.