What's Wrong with Capitalism (Part 1) | ContraPoints - General

[QUOTE=sgman91;53019036]Bad arguments are still bad arguments. There seem to be a few basic assumptions in this video: 1) People are not responsible enough to have the freedom to make their own economic choices. Instead, the creator of this video knows a lot more about what's good for you than you do. 2) The current world is a bad place to live in. I would argue that both are just totally false.[/QUOTE] I really like ContraPoints, actually. Also did do teaching at a university or something, I believe, so I'd argue she knows a little more about political philosophy than you.

[QUOTE=Dan The Man;53031907]I really like ContraPoints, actually. [B]Also did do teaching at a university or something, I believe, so I'd argue she knows a little more about political philosophy than you.[/B][/QUOTE] Contra did but this isn't an argument lol

[QUOTE=WhyNott;53031524]First of all, the term "civilasational collapse" does not mean the end of civilisation understood as a chain of knowledge and culture, just the organization and society. Even if society collapses, we will still not "go back to square one". Most of our science and knowledge will likely still prevail, depending who gets to be saved.[/quote] You mean all of our internet-based knowledge and libraries will somehow survive a civilizational collapse? Besides, such a disastrous future will need farmers/hunters/gatherers, to afford to keep people educated and to form new scientists (because our current ones will die eventually) you need a food surplus, something that's not at all guaranteed if we keep going down this path. [Quote]Second of all, you're forgeting that the any impending ecological catastrophe will not come without the warining signs. Right now its easy for people to believe that climate change doesnt exist, or that its natural, or whatever. Once thousands of people start loosing homes and/or lives, this will be much harder, if only just because people will look for someone to take responsibility for it. Assuming that wont be enough to turn the public opinion enough to start taking things seriously and mitigate the risk of further disaster, you can bet that every rich 1% asshole and governemnt that isnt a complete insane is either gonna invest in ways to save their asses in case shit hits the fan, be it contengency plans or shelters. A nuclear war was a much more viable threat because of how sudden and immiediate it could be. Any ecological disaster will give us plenty of time to prepare.[/quote] This is naive, have you actually read up on climate change? It has a delayed effect. Which means that if we only take the threat seriously when it already has disastrous effects, it will get [I]much[/I] worse even if we completely cut our emissions overnight. We've [I]already[/I] had plenty of warning signs. The amount of natural disasters has increased and climatic refugees already exist. But that doesn't stop people from playing stupid, and the 1% you seem to be so convinced will do something about it doesn't seem to want to change things either. Who said that being powerful entails being reasonable? [Quote]All of it is obviously based on the assumption that our ecological problems can actually result in a major civilisation-ending disaster, which Im not completely convinced could even happen at this point.[/QUOTE] And why couldn't it? Because we're "smart"? If we actually were smart as a species, we would have tackled this problem long ago. But we didn't, because our economic system encourages doing the opposite. Our civilization is heavily reliant on our ecosystem, whether you believe it or not. Something as simple as loss of arable land and a water crisis (which will happen if climate change is left unchecked) could completely shatter our fragile structure.

[QUOTE=_Axel;53032172]You mean all of our internet-based knowledge and libraries will somehow survive a civilizational collapse? Besides, such a disastrous future will need farmers/hunters/gatherers, to afford to keep people educated and to form new scientists (because our current ones will die eventually) you need a food surplus, something that's not at all guaranteed if we keep going down this path.[/QUOTE] When I mean knowledge I don't mean libraries, I mean the techniques and advances in science and medicine that will get passed on among the survivors just because they are immediately useful. Technology isn't just all TV's and electricity and atoms, it's also things like agriculture where we have made considerable progress along since the days of ice age and the cavemen. Also, you only need local food surplus for a group of people. As cruel as it may sound, human societies are usually pretty good at ensuring that those at the top get fed well even the rest is starving. [QUOTE=_Axel;53032172]This is naive, have you actually read up on climate change? It has a delayed effect. Which means that if we only take the threat seriously when it already has disastrous effects, it will get [I]much[/I] worse even if we completely cut our emissions overnight.[/quote] The fact that the climate change itself will get worse doesn't mean that we can't take steps to mitigate it's effects on our society. It's not the temperature changes itself that are dangerous, it's the way they affect the economy and politics (and raising sea levels). Even if global warming can't be directly reversed or stopped (which we don't even know for sure), we could ensure that the wound it will cause will not be fatal if we prepare in advance. [QUOTE=_Axel;53032172]We've [I]already[/I] had plenty of warning signs. The amount of natural disasters has increased and climatic refugees already exist. But that doesn't stop people from playing stupid, and the 1% you seem to be so convinced will do something about it doesn't seem to want to change things either. Who said that being powerful entails being reasonable?[/quote] If people in power weren't reasonable, how would they get in power? Sure, a portion of them may be delusional and another portion just outright stupid outside of the few areas that allowed them to rise (trump), but the vast majority of them are smarter and better informed then we are right now. They might not do anything about the global warming now because it's against their interests to do so, but so is the eventual collapse of the civilization. If it will get worse, they will be the ones to smell it. I suspect the reason why so little is done about climate change right now is largely due to big conflicts of interest, but as time goes on the pressure will increase and most of them will have to give in. [QUOTE=_Axel;53032172] And why couldn't it? Because we're "smart"? If we actually were smart as a species, we would have tackled this problem long ago. But we didn't, because our economic system encourages doing the opposite. [/quote] Human society as a collective is not very good with long-term strategy. In that aspect, it is very non-smart. However, we are rather good at solving pressing short-term problems. I think a cold war is a good example - a horrible, horrible situation that we got into due to lack of foresight, and which we managed to survive due to day-to-day struggle of thousands of people focused on not having their cities nuked this week. However, in that quote I was mostly focused on this aspect: [QUOTE=_Axel;53032172] Our civilization is heavily reliant on our ecosystem, whether you believe it or not. Something as simple as loss of arable land and a water crisis (which will happen if climate change is left unchecked) could completely shatter our fragile structure.[/QUOTE] Now, I can't test the validity of whether or not our civilization could actually collapse due to the factors that you have described, and I don't think anyone else can either. My question was more about whether climate change is likely to result in these situations according to current predictions. That was a honest question, I literally don't know.

[QUOTE=WhyNott;53032415]When I mean knowledge I don't mean libraries, I mean the techniques and advances in science and medicine that will get passed on among the survivors just because they are immediately useful. Technology isn't just all TV's and electricity and atoms, it's also things like agriculture where we have made considerable progress along since the days of ice age and the cavemen.[/QUOTE] Progress that relies on electricity and other modern commodities. Mechanized agriculture is worthless if you can't be supplied with gas and power. Modern technology is deeply intertwined, you can't just take an isolated branch and save it while ignoring others. [QUOTE]Also, you only need local food surplus for a group of people. As cruel as it may sound, human societies are usually pretty good at ensuring that those at the top get fed well even the rest is starving.[/QUOTE] If a very local food surplus was sufficient, specialization would have started before the arrival of agriculture. [QUOTE]The fact that the climate change itself will get worse doesn't mean that we can't take steps to mitigate it's effects on our society. It's not the temperature changes itself that are dangerous, it's the way they affect the economy and politics (and raising sea levels). Even if global warming can't be directly reversed or stopped (which we don't even know for sure), we could ensure that the wound it will cause will not be fatal if we prepare in advance. [/QUOTE] Global warming isn't limited to raising sea levels. It fucks with the entirety of the environment, which can go south [I]very quickly.[/I] Once a mass extinction event starts you'll have a [I]very[/I] hard time mitigating its effects, because it's a chain reaction with increasingly harsher consequences. [QUOTE]If people in power weren't reasonable, how would they get in power?[/QUOTE] Since when is being wise and reasonable a requirement to acquire power? [QUOTE]Sure, a portion of them may be delusional and another portion just outright stupid outside of the few areas that allowed them to rise (trump), but the vast majority of them are smarter and better informed then we are right now. They might not do anything about the global warming now because it's against their interests to do so, but so is the eventual collapse of the civilization. If it will get worse, they will be the ones to smell it. I suspect the reason why so little is done about climate change right now is largely due to big conflicts of interest, but as time goes on the pressure will increase and most of them will have to give in.[/QUOTE] So you're essentially putting your faith in our corporate overlords? What makes you think they don't share the same misplaced optimism as you do? They're businessmen, not scientists. I bet most of them are just thinking "humanity is strong, scientists will just figure out a way to reverse it eventually". [QUOTE]Human society as a collective is not very good with long-term strategy. In that aspect, it is very non-smart. However, we are rather good at solving pressing short-term problems. I think a cold war is a good example - a horrible, horrible situation that we got into due to lack of foresight, and which we managed to survive due to day-to-day struggle of thousands of people focused on not having their cities nuked this week.[/QUOTE] But global warming isn't a short-term problem. By the time people feel their life is as immediately threatened by it as they were by nuclear apocalypse it will already be too late. [QUOTE]Now, I can't test the validity of whether or not our civilization could actually collapse due to the factors that you have described, and I don't think anyone else can either. My question was more about whether climate change is likely to result in these situations according to current predictions. That was a honest question, I literally don't know.[/QUOTE] Unchecked global warming is projected to [url=https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/climate-impacts/climate-impacts-water-resources_.html]reduce water availability[/url] and [url=http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/6/1/014014/meta]decrease the global amount of arable land[/url], though to what extent it will is a crapshoot due to how complex of an issue this is.

I can't really get past a single day now without thinking of the impending doom of some kind of catastrophic war that might catapult everything into a very grim wasteland. Everything's fueled by greed, the foundation we live within, the computer I'm relaying this message with. Children died in pit mines in Africa just to get the metal, arbitrary design limits it to a couple years use before it breaks down and then kids in China wander a toxic landfill to salvage the metal after I'm done with it and flow it back into the system of resource value. I'm not quite sure how many hands have contributed to this because they were buried in industrious detail and undocumented time. It doesn't go away if you try and ignore it, the garbage just piles up. The landfill just fills the whole Earth, forming little garbage isles in the Pacific. The garbage water keeps flooding and every generations children raised to play in garbage, splash the water and play in the dump. When I worked at McDonalds I'd have nightmares from looking at their garbage pits. One slip and you fall into a pit full of hundreds of pounds of squishy foul smelling McGarbage tm. I kept waking up in cold sweat thinking of falling in and suffocating like falling into quicksand. Work anywhere and do the math in your head as you're working. How many parts did you install today? Whats their total value over time? I'm making a few hundred dollars after a workweek, but I swear at a minimum each part was worth that alone, and I installed thousands. How many parts broke, how many did we throw away on top of that? Every job, count the waste, count the product, count the value. Scratch your head. Raised from birth to drivel and droll and work and starve and suffer. Raised from birth to idealize toys and gadgets and food and fashion. Raised from birth to believe in doing a good job and having a career. Snowballs of dollar reasoning. A gun to a head and their gun to your head. Dollar dominoes fall down. What do you want to be when you grow up? Whats your value to all of us? Seeing the little ants march along, but they seem to know where they belong. Money's the blood; covered in blood. It flows in a system and renews itself, a finite number circulated to work without end but then we meet our end. I wish I wasn't afraid. I wish we didn't have to argue over what short stick we have is the best stick. I wish this earthday party didn't have to run out of cake and grape juice. I'm not sure how much time's left in the hourglass. I'm not sure if we get to flip it back over. There's no reset button. Just an arrow in the sky and flashing white light.

[QUOTE=_Axel;53032546]Since when is being wise and reasonable a requirement to acquire power?[/QUOTE] It's not a requirement, but more of a correlation. Sure, dumb people can get into position of power if they are lucky, but holding for an extended period of time requires you to be reasonable and intelligent in at least some aspects. [QUOTE=_Axel;53032546]So you're essentially putting your faith in our corporate overlords? What makes you think they don't share the same misplaced optimism as you do? They're businessmen, not scientists. I bet most of them are just thinking "humanity is strong, scientists will just figure out a way to reverse it eventually".[/QUOTE] Corporate overlords (I was thinking more generally also about high-ranking government people and public figures) believe in data. Their sole job description is to gain as much capital as humanly possible by whatever means are available to them. Most of the time, they can't afford to be delusional or ignorant. They know very well about global warming, if only because they are probably already looking into ways to make money off it. After all, they (along with government institutions) are the ones who pay the scientists. But yeah, I think what you're saying might have some merit. I still think that we will pull through, but the global warming stuff is a little worse then I thought, especially with the possibility of an extinction event. Sorry for callin you a fear-mongerer.

[QUOTE=Agoat;53031274]This video opens in the worst way possible. "What did these people die for?" They were killed by terrorists. They didn't have a choice. Jesus.[/QUOTE] I was kind of thinking this was parody with the intro and gritted through the mostly awful start and this weird "ha ha I'm a young person who hates paying for things but gimme those lava cakes mmm fuck capitalism." I had to stop somewhere around "everything wrong is middle-class white people", "snowflake" being defined incorrectly, and unironically using Revolution 60 as an argument about how men can't stand women in games or something to that tune. Is it just a big parody intro and I just ducked out too soon before the good arguments started?

[QUOTE=Berman Slick;53033184]I mean have you ever heard of Somalia [editline]7th January 2018[/editline] Or Yemen or Sudan or the Neskantaga First Nation[/QUOTE] Places like that have existed basically since humans have invented warfare and cruelty. I'm sure he means people in general, not in a few cherry-picked war-torn states.

[QUOTE=WhyNott;53033275]Places like that have existed basically since humans have invented warfare and cruelty. I'm sure he means people in general, not in a few cherry-picked war-torn states.[/QUOTE] I'd argue that a large part of Africa has it worse now than it had before colonization.

[QUOTE=WhyNott;53033275]Places like that have existed basically since humans have invented warfare and cruelty. I'm sure he means people in general, not in a few cherry-picked war-torn states.[/QUOTE] In Capitalism, deleterious effects on the environment and human rights violations occur out of sight in developing nations rather than right at home, and we've become tired of protesting for/helping people 10000 km away who we'll never see. We've also cut up Africa into little pieces like it's a jigsaw puzzle, splitting friends and forcing enemies together which has resulted in massacres, mass slavery and genocide. The current improvements to Africa come in the form of weather balloons with wi-fi and hospitals/water treatment plants being erected, it's like giving someone a lollipop to apologize for putting them through a wood chipper. "Better off" means you didn't cause the rwandan genocide. We're still getting rare metals important in consumer electronics from slaves.

[QUOTE=WhyNott;53033275]Places like that have existed basically since humans have invented warfare and cruelty. I'm sure he means people in general, not in a few cherry-picked war-torn states.[/QUOTE] A friendly reminder that 14 countries in Africa still pay Colonial Tax towards France. And IIRC,the former president of France said that had it not been for that tax,France itself would be significantly poorer than it is now. Edit:Turns out I'm retarded and susceptible to hoaxes as my 1st statement is not true.Read _Axel's post.

[QUOTE=Idzo;53034085]A friendly reminder that 14 countries in Africa still pay Colonial Tax towards France. And IIRC,the former president of France said that had it not been for that tax,France itself would be significantly poorer than it is now.[/QUOTE] Got a credible source?

[QUOTE=_Axel;53028826]I never claimed there was. You said the world is better than it ever has been before, and it isn't, nor is the direction it's taking.[/QUOTE] In terms of climate, sure? But economically, no? [editline]8th January 2018[/editline] Being able to feed your family > Other people having more money than you

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;53034394]Got a credible source?[/QUOTE] That's a hoax, actually. However the franc CFA is tied to the euro in a way that's pretty disadvantageous for the development of the countries that use it. [editline]8th January 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=JohanGS;53035639]In terms of climate, sure? But economically, no?[/QUOTE] The economy isn't all there is to the world though. [QUOTE]Being able to feed your family > Other people having more money than you[/QUOTE] That's true, though don't be too quick to dismiss income inequalities as being irrelevant. Relative wealth means more relative power, especially since the wealthy are in a position that lets them accrue even more wealth.

[QUOTE=01271;53034060]In Capitalism, deleterious effects on the environment and human rights violations occur out of sight in developing nations rather than right at home, and we've become tired of protesting for/helping people 10000 km away who we'll never see. We've also cut up Africa into little pieces like it's a jigsaw puzzle, splitting friends and forcing enemies together which has resulted in massacres, mass slavery and genocide. The current improvements to Africa come in the form of weather balloons with wi-fi and hospitals/water treatment plants being erected, it's like giving someone a lollipop to apologize for putting them through a wood chipper. "Better off" means you didn't cause the rwandan genocide. We're still getting rare metals important in consumer electronics from slaves.[/QUOTE] How is that different from the concept of empires and conquests that has existed for thousands of years? The only things that have changed is that now these things are seen as a pathology, and not just the way things need to be. Ancient rome had basically everything you had described so far, and the only difference is that [B]no one would even bother[/B] to protest/help people 10000 km away because they couldn't/wouldn't be willing to, since they owned slaves themselves. Sure, africa might arguably be worse off then during pre-colonial times socially and politically to an extent, but for some people see things blood diamonds and brutal dictatorships as a product of modern times, while identical things not only existed but were widespread in past times. Ever heard of, you know, slavery? If you want to bring up modern slaves in Liberia, keep in mind such things were absolutely common and "natural" in [i]all civilized world.[/i] And I don't mean sweatshop worker-style "slaves", I mean actual we-own-you-work-your-ass-for-every-single-day-of-your-life-until-we-decide-you're-too-old-and-kill-you slavery. Which still happens sometimes in some places, but is considered a global problem and a huge controversy, and not the fucking status quo.

[QUOTE=_Axel;53035924]The economy isn't all there is to the world though.[/QUOTE] Some would disagree, which is why I think it's good to be specific. I agree though. [QUOTE=_Axel;53035924]That's true, though don't be too quick to dismiss income inequalities as being irrelevant. Relative wealth means more relative power, especially since the wealthy are in a position that lets them accrue even more wealth.[/QUOTE] I think legislation should be alert to flatten that potential disparity. I don't think it's inherently bad though.

[QUOTE=_Axel;53035924]That's a hoax, actually. However the franc CFA is tied to the euro in a way that's pretty disadvantageous for the development of the countries that use it. [/QUOTE] It seems like a mixed bag reading about it, not quite decisively disadvantageous. Anyways they aren't forced into it either. Mali, Guinea, Madagascar, etc. have quit the currency union just fine. If they believe it's a harmful arrangement nowadays they can leave if they want.

[QUOTE=JohanGS;53036127]Some would disagree, which is why I think it's good to be specific. I agree though. I think legislation should be alert to flatten that potential disparity. I don't think it's inherently bad though.[/QUOTE] How is it going to respond to that, when they're able to be lobbied by industries to carry favor?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53036728]How is it going to respond to that, when they're able to be lobbied by industries to carry favor?[/QUOTE] Get rid of lobbying ideally.

[QUOTE=JohanGS;53037661]Get rid of lobbying ideally.[/QUOTE] Would that include lobbying from non-business interests like NGOs, unions, non-profit groups, etc.?

[QUOTE=sgman91;53037901]Would that include lobbying from non-business interests like NGOs, unions, non-profit groups, etc.?[/QUOTE] Yes, no, yes, yes.

"Get rid of lobbying" is something you can say as an indicator that you don't understand government. Lobbying is required for a functioning government, you might have a case of limiting what lobbyists can do (along with making politicians less dependent on said ties) since most of the damage is from people building deep ties with politicians and lining up their futures ofc, but don't mistarget.

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;53037951]"Get rid of lobbying" is something you can say as an indicator that you don't understand government. Lobbying is required for a functioning government, you might have a case of limiting what lobbyists can do (along with making politicians less dependent on said ties) since most of the damage is from people building deep ties with politicians and lining up their futures ofc, but don't mistarget.[/QUOTE] Yeah, lobbying is impossible to get rid of, but there should be significant steps to make it transparent, and limit the effectiveness of it.

[QUOTE=WhyNott;53035993]How is that different from the concept of empires and conquests that has existed for thousands of years? The only things that have changed is that now these things are seen as a pathology, and not just the way things need to be. Ancient rome had basically everything you had described so far, and the only difference is that [B]no one would even bother[/B] to protest/help people 10000 km away because they couldn't/wouldn't be willing to, since they owned slaves themselves. Sure, africa might arguably be worse off then during pre-colonial times socially and politically to an extent, but for some people see things blood diamonds and brutal dictatorships as a product of modern times, while identical things not only existed but were widespread in past times. Ever heard of, you know, slavery? If you want to bring up modern slaves in Liberia, keep in mind such things were absolutely common and "natural" in [i]all civilized world.[/i] And I don't mean sweatshop worker-style "slaves", I mean actual we-own-you-work-your-ass-for-every-single-day-of-your-life-until-we-decide-you're-too-old-and-kill-you slavery. Which still happens sometimes in some places, but is considered a global problem and a huge controversy, and not the fucking status quo.[/QUOTE] I mean, the basis of Capitalism was formed during the height of the English and Spanish empires.

[QUOTE=SunsetTable;53038127]I mean, the basis of Capitalism was formed during the height of the English and Spanish empires.[/QUOTE] I'm not arguing for or against capitalism specifically. I am arguing against the claim that humanity in general (and not just africa) isn't doing better today then it has during most if not all of it's history.

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;53037951]"Get rid of lobbying" is something you can say as an indicator that you don't understand government. Lobbying is required for a functioning government, you might have a case of limiting what lobbyists can do (along with making politicians less dependent on said ties) since most of the damage is from people building deep ties with politicians and lining up their futures ofc, but don't mistarget.[/QUOTE] That's what I meant. Sorry.