• treefrog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    First of all, you’re cherry picking one paragraph out of three while ignoring my point. Second, you seem to be doing so in hopes of creating a false dichotomy (technology is dependant on capitalism, it’s not) and a strawman (that all extraction is bad).

    Non-captalist economic systems can certainly extract resources from the environment and they’re quite capable of producing new technologies without worker explotation. Capitalism is ruthlessly effecient at it because it ignores things like negative externalities while passing them onto local governments, workers, and consumers. Ruthless being the keyword here. In fact, I’d say it’s inefficient and simply irresponsible.

    If you want to argue that the economic system we’re all watching literally destroy most life on this planet has some benefits the burden of proof is on you. List the benefits and compare them to other systems. If the benefit is that it’s better than slavery well, you’re basically comparing two diseases to each other and saying the benefit of disease A is at least it’s not cancer. If my Dr used language like this I’d fire him.

    Capitalism is a disease on this planet. Diseases don’t have benefits. Only worse choices. Feel free to prove me otherwise, but you’ll have to do better than tired right wing and neo-liberal talking points. I’ve been through them to many times, sorry.

    • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      you’re cherry picking one paragraph

      Cherry Picking means selecting a single set of data that supports my argument while ignoring other data to the contrary. It does not mean selecting only a part of your argument to rebut.

      in hopes of creating a false dichotomy

      A false dichotomy means reducing a large set of choices to merely two. an assertion that technology is dependent on capitalism is not that.

      a strawman

      Pretty much any argument can be categorised as a strawman.

      Listing logical fallacies in order to make yourself appear more knowledgeable would work better if you could identify them correctly.

      Regardless, I’m not going to be able to reason with someone who makes ridiculous claims like “Capitalism is a disease on this planet” (which is an appeal to emotion by the way), so I’ll leave you to congratulate yourself on winning this little tete-a-tete. I look forward to reading your parting witticism.

      • treefrog@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Okay, I don’t know the logical fallacies by name. I do know when someone isn’t arguing in good faith and being dismissive. I do know when they’re resorting to passive-aggressive personal attacks, too. So, I’m just going to restate my argument that you continue to dismiss, in plain English, not for you, but for anyone else that comes across this.

        Capitalism is a primary contributing factor to global mass extinction that is currently taking place. That’s comparable to a disease. Its competitive advantages are not showing to be beneficial because they’re based on negative externalities. In the long wrong (i.e. right now), those negative externalities are proving to be destructive, rather than beneficial, for almost everyone that lives on this planet. Its advantage is that’s irresponsible. It’s aggressive. Most of the life on this planet is not benefiting from this aggressive behavior. And, there were, and still are, less aggressive options.

        I may not know all my logical fallacies, but I do know economics.

        And you’ve done nothing to change my mind because ultimately you refused to engage with the argument in good faith.