I seriously cannot have any degree of nuanced conversation here.

Like I get it, we all know capitalism is bad, but it feels like every time I or anyone go towards discussing the steps that need to be taken to address current looming problems in the short term, someone has to jump in and shut it down with "capitalism bad >:[ " and tear down any idea presented because its not complete and total destruction of the current economic model.

The result just feels like an echo chamber where no actual solutions get presented other than someone posting whole ass dissertations on their 33-step (where 30/33 steps are about as vague as “we’ll just handle it”) plan to fully convert the world to an anarchist commune.

Edit: I still vastly prefer Lemmy and the fediverse and a whole, my complaint here is that many of you are TOO INTENSE. You blow up small scale discussion.

  • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    0·
    9 months ago

    Not every post I make is meant to be a convincing call to action. Not every situation is going to be helped at this. I surmised that this thread - full of smug centrists pointing out how we “have to be realistic” and downvoting everyone pointing out that being this way has led us directly to a climate apocalypse - is not going to be worth the effort.

    (that I don’t think fits very well to reality)

    I think it’s the most apt analogy there is. There, the only possible solution would have been an effective mutiny, to wrest the wheel from the captain and sail to safer waters, and damn the journey time or company profits. Much like the only solution we have right now it to wrest the “wheel” of society from the rich an d damn company profits.

    But I saw you elsewhere engaging in unscientific climate denialism, much like every capitalist apologist has to in order to stave of cognitivie dissonance, so I have no patience to talk to antiscientific people.

    Surely you realize that these topics are complicated and there’s not a black/white dichotomy? Can you understand how OP and others might find comments like that off-putting, as you either need to fully agree or you’re part of the problem?

    There is no complications in saying that an Anthropogenic extinction is underway and we need to stop the system powering it.

    • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
      0·
      9 months ago

      But I saw you elsewhere engaging in unscientific climate denialism, much like every capitalist apologist has to in order to stave of cognitivie dissonance, so I have no patience to talk to antiscientific people.

      Where? I’m sorry if I’ve offended you but I am definitely in favour of doing all we can to stop climate change and I am definitely not anti-scientific or in denial about climate change (I fully believe climate change exists and is caused by humans, for the record).

      Please, let’s not devolve to name-calling or insults.

      • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        0·
        9 months ago

        But again, these things are complicated and any discussion around them must reflect that with nuance. It’s hard to say if climate change would have happened regardless of capitalism - it could be.

        This implies that climate change would have happened on its own.

        • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
          0·
          9 months ago

          That’s not what I meant. I meant that there’s many different types of societies and capitalism is just one of them. It’s perfectly possible that we could’ve had something other than capitalism (if only) and we still would’ve dug oil out of the ground and burned it to cause climate change. Capitalism is bad and causes climate change, but I’m sure many other types of societies (maybe not all) would also do it.

          • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            0·
            9 months ago

            Historic Revisionism is just apologia with extra steps. As if you can’t engage in direct whataboutism, so you have to invent a fictional whataboutism.

            Facts of the matter is that Capitalism did directly lead to climate apocalypse. We knew the effects of burning fossil fuels since the 19th century, but all steps to prevent this scenario were thwarted by, you guessed it, capitalists and rich directly funding lobbyists and misinformation campaigns.

            • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
              0·
              9 months ago

              I’m not defending capitalism or anything of the sort. I’m just saying that changing society is complicated and it will take a long time. If I could flip a switch and we had a better world, that’d be great, but unfortunately reality is not that easy.

              I really think we agree on capitalism (yes, it’s bad) and climate change (yes, fueled by capitalism and also very bad), so there’s no need to accuse me of anything. That made me quite uncomfortable and that makes me quite sad and makes me empathize with OPs complaint. It’s mostly about how it’s said and the absolute-ness of the terms. Hope you have a nice day

              • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                0·
                9 months ago

                Nobody said it was simple to change society. What is simple is recognizing that we need to get rid of Capitalism.

                The problem with the op’s “discussing problems short term” is that what they mean is “let’s waste time trying to reform Capitalism yet again and hope it to be turns out differently this time unlike the 1000 times before it”

                • TheFonz@lemmy.world
                  0·
                  9 months ago

                  You can do both, you know? This all or nothing is exactly what is turning people off. Mostly because those in your camp are mostly doing…nothing but posting the same comment. Either give us a roadmap to action or shut. The. Fuck. Up.