3 ms·

It is very interesting when capitalists confess that capitalism itself will never solve these issues. It throws away delusional thinking by the uninformed. Any

It is very interesting when capitalists confess that capitalism itself will never solve these issues. It throws away delusional thinking by the uninformed. Any hope of solving environmental issues rests in having a government that is powerful enough compared to the market and willing to work against businesses main financial interests. We're just seeing the example of tech companies, which for years paraded around as earth saviors with pledges of "carbon neutrality", just to discard any such plans when competition for AI supremacy makes them spend as much energy as they possibly can, as quickly as possible, the environment be damned.

_DeadFred_ 2y ago
I mean that line of thought has been core to capitalism from the start though. The originators of capitalism argued that it needed strong governments to stop/prevent the negative aspects of capitalism (such as stopping collusion and monopolistic behavior). By it's nature and from the beginning one of capitalism's core requirements is that capitalism cannot function without a framework of rules and enforcement mechanisms that only a strong government can provide.
- coliveira 2y ago
  It needs to be a government that is not controlled by companies and billionaires.
  - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
    Agreed. All of the original capitalist thinkers specified that very very clearly.
ebiester 2y ago
Okay, so I agree with many leftist critiques of capitalism, but we can also tell that communism also caused environmental destruction, particularly in the soviet block. Mixed economies are not doing that much better - see the Norwegian sovereign fund as but one example. Further, I'd argue that the opposite of a weak state is a totalitarian one, not a socialist one. And I'm arguing that the problem is you need over 200 governments to agree on both it and its enforcement, and that the wealth disparity between countries in and of itself will cause game theory issues for these sorts of agreements to break down, even if each government was enlightened socialist. Capitalism is making it worse, to be sure, but socialism is not a solution here in and of itself.

_DeadFred_ 2y ago

I mean that line of thought has been core to capitalism from the start though. The originators of capitalism argued that it needed strong governments to stop/prevent the negative aspects of capitalism (such as stopping collusion and monopolistic behavior). By it's nature and from the beginning one of capitalism's core requirements is that capitalism cannot function without a framework of rules and enforcement mechanisms that only a strong government can provide.

coliveira 2y ago
It needs to be a government that is not controlled by companies and billionaires.
- _DeadFred_ 2y ago
  Agreed. All of the original capitalist thinkers specified that very very clearly.

ebiester 2y ago

Okay, so I agree with many leftist critiques of capitalism, but we can also tell that communism also caused environmental destruction, particularly in the soviet block. Mixed economies are not doing that much better - see the Norwegian sovereign fund as but one example. Further, I'd argue that the opposite of a weak state is a totalitarian one, not a socialist one. And I'm arguing that the problem is you need over 200 governments to agree on both it and its enforcement, and that the wealth disparity between countries in and of itself will cause game theory issues for these sorts of agreements to break down, even if each government was enlightened socialist. Capitalism is making it worse, to be sure, but socialism is not a solution here in and of itself.