• Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    For example, capitalists would hoard land to seek ransoms in exchange of its access. This causes land unaffordability and under usage. If socialism eliminates that, more land might be used and there might be more environmental destruction as a result.

    I don’t think that’s true. Underused land is not necessarily protected, for example, you can dump chemical waste on a plot of land and that makes you money without developing it. Industrialized farming uses a lot of pesticides and takes up a huge amount of land without caring too much about individual plants bc of quantity over quality. Meanwhile people still have to live and work somewhere, and there’s no guarantee that that somewhere will be less environmentally destructive.

    I would agree that socialism has potential to be ecologically destructive but I disagree that capitalism does anything innately that protects the environment.

    • Microtom [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      but I disagree that capitalism does anything innately that protects the environment.

      I say that neither socialism nor capitalism do anything to attain sustainability.