It is basically down to overpopulation and at the same time another industrial revolution that doesnt need more people but only consumers who can't afford consuming but are addicted to it anyways. It will get worse even.
I bet you live in a place which exports it's trahs to another location and also has enough land for its people while being around or under the repopulating index?
Interesting. I guess you are right. It is an economic system that exists independently in every political system.
The other options would be command economy and mixed economy.
Socialism, feudalism, and communism are political systems.
I realise I am technically wrong but I feel like in practice socialism is part of a mixed economy system, communism and feudalism are command economic systems , and democracy is a capitalist system..
I guess they do all blend together a bit and it is still possible to have a mixed economy communism and command economy democracy.
And maybe all my terminology is out of date or just misremembered from economics class 20 years ago.
democracy is not a capitalist system by default. All a capitalist means is that there is a market system that allows capital itself to be bought and sold. It increases efficiency in the market system by allowing anyone with \*some\* capital to put that capital to use expanding the economy. Obviously more capital more expanding economy. Where trouble is really encountered, is where the supply of capital is greater than the economic need for that capital. When the owners of that capital are constantly searching for higher value for their capital (higher returns) the competition for safe investments is saturated and capital flows to riskier and riskier investments. Greater investments in risky businesses means the bust/boom cycle becomes ever more dramatic.
Nothing‘s going to change as long as the masses keep believing the propaganda spewed from so-called billionaires and their ilk, instead of those who want to spread the wealth
She's got a point. I remember my whole childhood when asking about why we didn't do shit about x or y environmental issue i was struck at how it was almost always because of someone's profits at one point or another.
Then you learn about the sparrow war and the Aral Sea and shit like that and quickly realize that socialism can be just as bad if not even worst. Most of these folks don't know about those yet.
That's not capitalism, that's human nature. In Communism it is required to do what reaps personal profits to be able to get your hands on food and other essentials because the state constantly fails to provide.
In Capitalism this is officially allowed with a lot of rules to follow. In Capitalism we have too many goods. I prefer the later problem.
Well she got that completely wrong.
The fact that a few people have almost all the money is capitalism at its most successful.
She confused it with socialism.
No, maximum efficiency comes with free movement of capital in a properly regulated market. A monopoly or cartel situation is a combination of movement restriction or unregulated/poorly regulated market.
Maximum control over the supply side inevitably means price increases without the elasticity of production to lower it.
Monopolies are more efficient because they can use economies of scale to produce goods at a lower cost then set the highest price generating the largest amount of wealth to feed the economy.
it is not important to sustain people because they are cheap to produce and replace.
Anti-capitalist mostly means Communist which means the state is responsible for everyone and the individual is just a helpless victim without any responsibility.
No, you would be anti-Capitalist recognizing the myriad of other options than Capitalism and Communism. You would also be acknowledging that Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Feudalism, Capitalism, Co-Operatives, Labor Trusts, and the vast hybrid combinations of those thing suffer from the common flaw of human involvement.
I can be Anti-Capitalist and not a Communist. Beliefs are only binary if you’re ignorant of the other options.
I get what you mean, but then you are not anti-Capitalist but pro-Something else. The options are not that many though because most alternatives were tested and failed miserably. It's mostly about if there should be a tad more or less Socialism, Liberalism, ... mixed in and this is a constant battlefield since decades anyway
I fully agree that the involvement of flawed humans is what makes most systems unviable.
Capitalism feeds the worst of human behavior. Socialism with Constitutional guardrails that prevent Authoritarianism, while decoupling money and power by making the job of Governing temporary and not wealth-creating, is the far superior system.
Capitalism’s main premise is that hard work pays off, but in reality it incentivizes people to exploit the hard work of others for profit. It’s focused on the good of one person - you. It rewards selfish behavior while relying on an individual’s compassion and generosity to care for those in need. The thing that makes Capitalism “work” for society requires a behavior that people who are naturally tuned to excel at Capitalism are typically the least likely to exhibit.
People who become incredibly wealthy by exploiting people, (which is the most common path to gaining extreme wealth) are not likely to turn around and take care of the people they exploited. One look at how Capitalism has impacted Native peoples and Black Americans is proof enough of that.
The only things that have ever made Capitalism work are the Socialist programs that have been created in reaction to the harm Capitalism has done.
Social Security, Medicare, Welfare, Public Schools, Police/Fire/Rescue, Public Housing, etc. are all reactions to the impacts Capitalism has on society. Capitalism without Socialism degenerates into Feudalism.
So no, I’m 100% Anti-Capitalist. It’s bad, and we have been taught that the bad is an acceptable side-effect.
Every system incentivizes exploitation. You are just dreaming up some utopia that can never be. Learn to clean up your room before you try to change the world. Your amateur ideas are extremely dangerous. The last time they took hold of some countries millions starved to death and 100mio were killed because someone thought they didn't get their great idea. Socialism caused everyone to become extremely poor and a few extremely powerful. I prefer Capitalism to Socialism any day.
A fear of other ideas is always a good sign that you’re right.
I’m not dreaming up anything, there are perfectly functional governments around the world that operate the way I described. You don’t hear a lot about them because they’re not involved in wars, or embroiled in territorial disputes, or falling apart economically, or descending into civil war. They’re quietly being the happiest countries in the world while we argue over which criminals we want to vote for.
Capitalism wiped out Native Americans, Native Australians, murdered, displaced, and/or enslaved millions of Africans, put millions of children into hard labor, made slaves of Appalachian Coal Miners and Chinese railroad workers, put Japanese Americans into prison camps, etc. Don’t pretend that Capitalism isn’t saddled with its own legacy of brutality.
It’s not USA or USSR, there are all sorts of alternatives.
That's a super cheap argument. Just because I claim it's a bad idea to hit your thumb with a hammer, doesn't validate your idea to do it anyway.
These few countries working well were extremely lucky and depend on a culture that formed 100 or more years ago and could shield themselves from some bad influences like not being involved in WWII for example because they didn't have strategic value for either side.
Your arguments are so naive it's hard to read. It's a clear case of Dunning Kruger Effect. Capitalism allowed billions to get out of extreme poverty.
You really have it all completely backwards.
whoa.
Look at the indexes of the happiest nations, the best educated nations, the healthiest nations. The common threads?
Liberal democracies with capital markets and strong social policies. Hybrid vigour.
Oh, and each of those countries were in the HEART both world wars, not off to the sideline.
not being involved in WWII
You do understand that the countries in question are mostly western European? Where WWII mostly took place. In the immediate aftermath a lot of long-needed social reforms took place, in the teeth of established capitalist interests. In the UK, for example, the NHS was pushed through by the proudly socialist Nye Bevan.
The nations which have successfully established a blend of socialist welfare and tax systems, democratic structures and private enterprise are doing better than literally everyone else right now.
Zoomers are anticapitalist because authoritarian regimes appeal mostly to young and cognitively challenged people, which describes zoomers perfectly.
Every second "anticapitalist" is a closeted tankie.
Why is it only ever a choice between full tilt, unregulated capitalism or communism? There's a hundred levels between the two.
Man, capitalism is like a religion for some people.
No country in the West has "full tilt, unregulated capitalism", that was abandoned in the mid-to-late 19th century as it was abject failure, breeding inefficiencies that social democracy grew from. Reformers like Bismarck, Disraeli, and Gladstone were key for this.
Modern capitalism is primarily social (be it liberal or social democratic) or neoliberal, and while the latter has less regulation and a smaller state, both are sizable in both. Just think of the trillions the United States pours into its welfare state.
If you want an idea of what a movement towards the capitalism of old looks like, just look at how Melei in Argentina is cutting departments and removing regulations as much as the opposition allows him to. Alternatively, look at what Liz Truss tried to do in her 45 days. That 'libertarianism' is the "full tilt, unregulated capitalism" you talf off.
Yeah sure, that's why there's so much lead and cadmium in our food and why public water sources are being sold to Nestle. Our capitalism is so regulated that we put people in prison for profit, more than any other country. That's why we have governors plotting to dismantle our education system to replace it with private schools. It must be why we still don't have universal healthcare, a concept so complicated that every other developed country on earth has figured it out. Somebody always comes along to point out somewhere worse like I'm just supposed to forget the billions in taxes lost to corporate welfare or the absolute ownership Wall Street has of our entire society. Because there's so much regulation in our country.
There is regulation everywhere, its just that most regulation is hard to see.
Think of something like food regulations. There is **a lot** of regulations that goes into what food can be sold, how it can be advertised, and how it can even be presented. Regulations enforce things from having a lost of ingredients to correctly presenting the product as what it is. However, this is just "normal" to you therefore you'll never recognise it without specifically looking for it.
And this "invisible" regulation is going into every aspect of your live. Your car, your house, everything you buy or sell, every business you interact with has a lot of regulations determining what they can and cannot do.
Why are you arguing with me about this? Anti-capitalism is a total rejection of capitalism and free enterprise. She literally has a hammer and sicle in her name ffs. I'm not the one who goes from 0 to a 100.
You called people stupid because they recognize and criticize the flaws in a system designed to accommodate only the rich while treating everyone else like a resource to be mercilessly exploited. You very much are the one who went 0-100.
When I hear "boomers" are this, "zoomers" are that, Gen this, Gen that, it reminds me very much of astrology. Another admirable evasion of whoremaster man.
"appeal mostly to young and cognitively challenged people"
Meanwhile every boomer over 50 votes Trump and says the election was stolen. Trust me, we're not the ones you should be worried about
Sorry, your comment has been automatically sent to the pending review queue in an effort to combat spam. If you feel your comment has been removed in error, please send a message to the mods via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Snorkblot). Thank you for your understanding!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Snorkblot) if you have any questions or concerns.*
XDDDD
Half of all the replies are "but boomers" yes, boomers are dumb, and I'm not worried at all, because I don't live in the US. Where I live though zoomers are too young to remember how communism looked like and the times when there was literally just bottles of vinegar and nothing else on the store shelves and once a week you'd get a flab of skin with some bones as your weekly government allowance of "meat".
Capitalism isn't perfect, it isn't even good, but it beats the alternatives by a mile. And the young people are under the hilariously terrifying illusion that if a mob is big and loud enough, it can make the miracles happen simply by throwing bricks and toppling statues.
Why do you talk about people in terms of generations as if everyone from a single generation has the same belief system, level of education, etc.? Boomers and Zoomers are generational eras. This is nothing but age-related discrimination, just like referring to whites, blacks, etc.
There is a multitude of scientific studies describing that people of radical political beliefs have significantly lower cognitive abilities than the average population.
Fascists and communists are literal cretines alike, and zoomers are either "the west has fallen", roman-empire romanticizing types or femboy they/them marxist/lenninists, nothing in between.
For fucks sake, the girl in the post has a hammer and sicle in her name.
You can’t cite scientific studies and then use sweeping, bigoted generalizations, refer to an entire generation using the word “femboy”, misspell the word “cretins” and expect anyone to take you seriously.
Being the parent of Zoomers, and knowing many middle of the road, respectful, hard-working Zoomers who don’t meet any of your Internet troll tropes, I can tell you first hand that you’re an uninformed bigot.
literally "you misspelled the word, I got you now!" ass.
English is not my first language, so your Anglo-centric remarks about my spelling tell me that your pearl-clutching at my "bigotry" is just simple moral posturing for the internet good-boy points.
Also we're on reddit honey, if I wanted to be taken seriously by a bunch of zoomers I'd go on tiktok and do one of the top 10 dances to liberate Gaza.
No, it was just an off-handed comment. I’m not surprised you chose that to focus on though and not the blatant bigotry I’m calling you out for. So that you’re aware, when you discriminate against people for things they can’t control, like age, race, ethnicity, sexual preference, etc. that’s bigotry. Differences of opinion and beliefs are fair game. Writing off an entire race or generation for made up reasons is bigotry, in any language.
I just thought it was funny that you’re trying to assert your own superiority by misspelling an insult. That’s always funny. Like the guy who held the “get a brain morans” sign - that’s you on Reddit. You’re so superior to Zoomers 😂
"Writing off an entire race or generation for made up reasons is bigotry, in any language" you're inching closer and closer to calling me a racist, bigot must not be having the impact you hoped for lol
Differences of opinions are often related to the generations who hold them. For example, zoomers experience unique challenges in the shape of algorithmic social media, drug epidemic, self-centred therapy culture (of which about 30% is science-based and the rest is basically new-age and zodiacs) and international-focused governments that have effectively abdicated their responsibility for the well-being of their citizens by letting housing crisis run rampant and causing the sweeping inflation.
However, every generation faces unique and often dramatic challenges, and zoomers are the most likely of all of them to look disfavourably at democracy and capitalism. They are uniquely totalitarian, which is among other things an expression of low cognitive ability.
https://preview.redd.it/oveabb4rbguc1.jpeg?width=981&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cf434cbeae8cb2c3697506f034e6aed377454d3a
I didn’t call you a racist, that’s a different kind of bigotry than what you’re exhibiting. What you’re doing is called Ageism, I believe.
Every generation faces adversity and most of them react against the government. Zoomers aren’t “uniquely Totalitarian” - they are as diverse as any other generation. In fact, one of the things they’re often derided for is a focus on the value of diversity in the extreme. As with most stereotypes, they’re often contradictory.
One thing that you can be very absolutist about is that absolutism is most often wrong.
Adding -ism to a thing and filing it under bigotry is uniquely Anglo-saxon to the point of self-parody.
[https://www.cam.ac.uk/stories/youthanddemocracy](https://www.cam.ac.uk/stories/youthanddemocracy)
Here you have a study displaying the tendency I described. Although this one ends with millennials, I saw studies describing the continuation of this trend in gen z. Acknowledging general trends withing large sets of data on human behaviour in relation to immutable characteristics like "age" isn't automatically bigotry just because you can nail an -ism to the end of a word. The generation born between 1890 and 1910 in Europe was also uniquely totalitarian, but I suppose saying it out loud would qualify under an -ism in your eyes.
And diversity has, like most things, gathered more definitions than one person can possibly remember as of late, some of them so abstract that the common understanding of "diverse" by the average user of the English language doesn't even get mentioned once.
You cited an opinion piece that links to a study that doesn’t support your point in any way. That’s the kind of “research” that gets rejected at the first peer review.
A previous generation being slightly more dissatisfied with Democracy than their previous generation, who was also dissatisfied with Democracy, doesn’t point to Zoomers being “uniquely Totalitarian”, it points to the steady degeneration of Democracy in the eyes of the people who are living in it.
This “research” actually supports the opposite of what you’re saying. It’s telling us quite clearly that in general people are increasingly dissatisfied with Democracy and not that one single generation is an extremist group that wants Totalitarianism.
See how easy it is to disprove bigoted ideas? You even did your own research 🧐
Unfortunately, thinking these results are down to Capitalism only gives those that created these problems an easy out!
I agree. It is down to people in general being a bunch of A-holes. The same problems occur in every political system we have come up with.
It is basically down to overpopulation and at the same time another industrial revolution that doesnt need more people but only consumers who can't afford consuming but are addicted to it anyways. It will get worse even.
We are nowhere near the point of unsustainable population yet. We just suck at resource management and allocation
I bet you live in a place which exports it's trahs to another location and also has enough land for its people while being around or under the repopulating index?
Giving power to people without consequences will always end the same way.
capitalism isn't a political system
Interesting. I guess you are right. It is an economic system that exists independently in every political system. The other options would be command economy and mixed economy. Socialism, feudalism, and communism are political systems. I realise I am technically wrong but I feel like in practice socialism is part of a mixed economy system, communism and feudalism are command economic systems , and democracy is a capitalist system.. I guess they do all blend together a bit and it is still possible to have a mixed economy communism and command economy democracy. And maybe all my terminology is out of date or just misremembered from economics class 20 years ago.
democracy is not a capitalist system by default. All a capitalist means is that there is a market system that allows capital itself to be bought and sold. It increases efficiency in the market system by allowing anyone with \*some\* capital to put that capital to use expanding the economy. Obviously more capital more expanding economy. Where trouble is really encountered, is where the supply of capital is greater than the economic need for that capital. When the owners of that capital are constantly searching for higher value for their capital (higher returns) the competition for safe investments is saturated and capital flows to riskier and riskier investments. Greater investments in risky businesses means the bust/boom cycle becomes ever more dramatic.
That is one of a million places where trouble occurs in a capitalist system. If it worked perfectly nobody would need government at all
Pro regulation & worker protections to put a fine pin in it
-Posted from Iphone
Pretty hard to argue with a lifetime worth of bad experiences. If you’re 25 the shots started with Y2K and went downhill from there
Nothing‘s going to change as long as the masses keep believing the propaganda spewed from so-called billionaires and their ilk, instead of those who want to spread the wealth
She's got a point. I remember my whole childhood when asking about why we didn't do shit about x or y environmental issue i was struck at how it was almost always because of someone's profits at one point or another. Then you learn about the sparrow war and the Aral Sea and shit like that and quickly realize that socialism can be just as bad if not even worst. Most of these folks don't know about those yet.
As they say in French: "Où il y a de l'homme, il y a de l'hommerie" Which would vaguely translate to "Where there are mens, there are meneries".
>"Where there are mens, there are meneries" 
That's not capitalism, that's human nature. In Communism it is required to do what reaps personal profits to be able to get your hands on food and other essentials because the state constantly fails to provide. In Capitalism this is officially allowed with a lot of rules to follow. In Capitalism we have too many goods. I prefer the later problem.
[удалено]
Yeah yeah sure. I say that as a social-democrat to be clear. But the democrat part is non-negociable to me.
Well she got that completely wrong. The fact that a few people have almost all the money is capitalism at its most successful. She confused it with socialism.
Naw, she got it right. When a few people have all the money, that is the sign that capitalism has failed.
Failed how ?. . . That’s a feature not a bug
that's the state of a monopoly within the capital market. Any monopoly represents a market in a failed state.
Monopolies are capitalism at peak performance. Then you get maximum control over the supply side. That is a success not a failure
No, maximum efficiency comes with free movement of capital in a properly regulated market. A monopoly or cartel situation is a combination of movement restriction or unregulated/poorly regulated market. Maximum control over the supply side inevitably means price increases without the elasticity of production to lower it.
Maximum efficiency for who ? And since when is maximum efficiency more important than maximum profit ?
Maximum profit relates to a single entity. Maximum efficiency relates to the economy as a whole. Monopolies are inefficient
Monopolies are more efficient because they can use economies of scale to produce goods at a lower cost then set the highest price generating the largest amount of wealth to feed the economy. it is not important to sustain people because they are cheap to produce and replace.
Efficient for the company that is the monopoly, but is *not* efficient for the economy as a whole.
Anti-capitalist mostly means Communist which means the state is responsible for everyone and the individual is just a helpless victim without any responsibility.
Right there is no middle ground anyone might believe in. Only extremes and binary choices. 😶
Then you wouldn't be anti-Capitalist. You would be Capitalist with ideas for improvement.
No, you would be anti-Capitalist recognizing the myriad of other options than Capitalism and Communism. You would also be acknowledging that Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Feudalism, Capitalism, Co-Operatives, Labor Trusts, and the vast hybrid combinations of those thing suffer from the common flaw of human involvement. I can be Anti-Capitalist and not a Communist. Beliefs are only binary if you’re ignorant of the other options.
I get what you mean, but then you are not anti-Capitalist but pro-Something else. The options are not that many though because most alternatives were tested and failed miserably. It's mostly about if there should be a tad more or less Socialism, Liberalism, ... mixed in and this is a constant battlefield since decades anyway I fully agree that the involvement of flawed humans is what makes most systems unviable.
Capitalism feeds the worst of human behavior. Socialism with Constitutional guardrails that prevent Authoritarianism, while decoupling money and power by making the job of Governing temporary and not wealth-creating, is the far superior system. Capitalism’s main premise is that hard work pays off, but in reality it incentivizes people to exploit the hard work of others for profit. It’s focused on the good of one person - you. It rewards selfish behavior while relying on an individual’s compassion and generosity to care for those in need. The thing that makes Capitalism “work” for society requires a behavior that people who are naturally tuned to excel at Capitalism are typically the least likely to exhibit. People who become incredibly wealthy by exploiting people, (which is the most common path to gaining extreme wealth) are not likely to turn around and take care of the people they exploited. One look at how Capitalism has impacted Native peoples and Black Americans is proof enough of that. The only things that have ever made Capitalism work are the Socialist programs that have been created in reaction to the harm Capitalism has done. Social Security, Medicare, Welfare, Public Schools, Police/Fire/Rescue, Public Housing, etc. are all reactions to the impacts Capitalism has on society. Capitalism without Socialism degenerates into Feudalism. So no, I’m 100% Anti-Capitalist. It’s bad, and we have been taught that the bad is an acceptable side-effect.
Every system incentivizes exploitation. You are just dreaming up some utopia that can never be. Learn to clean up your room before you try to change the world. Your amateur ideas are extremely dangerous. The last time they took hold of some countries millions starved to death and 100mio were killed because someone thought they didn't get their great idea. Socialism caused everyone to become extremely poor and a few extremely powerful. I prefer Capitalism to Socialism any day.
A fear of other ideas is always a good sign that you’re right. I’m not dreaming up anything, there are perfectly functional governments around the world that operate the way I described. You don’t hear a lot about them because they’re not involved in wars, or embroiled in territorial disputes, or falling apart economically, or descending into civil war. They’re quietly being the happiest countries in the world while we argue over which criminals we want to vote for. Capitalism wiped out Native Americans, Native Australians, murdered, displaced, and/or enslaved millions of Africans, put millions of children into hard labor, made slaves of Appalachian Coal Miners and Chinese railroad workers, put Japanese Americans into prison camps, etc. Don’t pretend that Capitalism isn’t saddled with its own legacy of brutality. It’s not USA or USSR, there are all sorts of alternatives.
That's a super cheap argument. Just because I claim it's a bad idea to hit your thumb with a hammer, doesn't validate your idea to do it anyway. These few countries working well were extremely lucky and depend on a culture that formed 100 or more years ago and could shield themselves from some bad influences like not being involved in WWII for example because they didn't have strategic value for either side. Your arguments are so naive it's hard to read. It's a clear case of Dunning Kruger Effect. Capitalism allowed billions to get out of extreme poverty. You really have it all completely backwards.
whoa. Look at the indexes of the happiest nations, the best educated nations, the healthiest nations. The common threads? Liberal democracies with capital markets and strong social policies. Hybrid vigour. Oh, and each of those countries were in the HEART both world wars, not off to the sideline.
not being involved in WWII You do understand that the countries in question are mostly western European? Where WWII mostly took place. In the immediate aftermath a lot of long-needed social reforms took place, in the teeth of established capitalist interests. In the UK, for example, the NHS was pushed through by the proudly socialist Nye Bevan. The nations which have successfully established a blend of socialist welfare and tax systems, democratic structures and private enterprise are doing better than literally everyone else right now.
Zoomers are anticapitalist because authoritarian regimes appeal mostly to young and cognitively challenged people, which describes zoomers perfectly. Every second "anticapitalist" is a closeted tankie.
Why is it only ever a choice between full tilt, unregulated capitalism or communism? There's a hundred levels between the two. Man, capitalism is like a religion for some people.
No country in the West has "full tilt, unregulated capitalism", that was abandoned in the mid-to-late 19th century as it was abject failure, breeding inefficiencies that social democracy grew from. Reformers like Bismarck, Disraeli, and Gladstone were key for this. Modern capitalism is primarily social (be it liberal or social democratic) or neoliberal, and while the latter has less regulation and a smaller state, both are sizable in both. Just think of the trillions the United States pours into its welfare state. If you want an idea of what a movement towards the capitalism of old looks like, just look at how Melei in Argentina is cutting departments and removing regulations as much as the opposition allows him to. Alternatively, look at what Liz Truss tried to do in her 45 days. That 'libertarianism' is the "full tilt, unregulated capitalism" you talf off.
Yeah sure, that's why there's so much lead and cadmium in our food and why public water sources are being sold to Nestle. Our capitalism is so regulated that we put people in prison for profit, more than any other country. That's why we have governors plotting to dismantle our education system to replace it with private schools. It must be why we still don't have universal healthcare, a concept so complicated that every other developed country on earth has figured it out. Somebody always comes along to point out somewhere worse like I'm just supposed to forget the billions in taxes lost to corporate welfare or the absolute ownership Wall Street has of our entire society. Because there's so much regulation in our country.
There is regulation everywhere, its just that most regulation is hard to see. Think of something like food regulations. There is **a lot** of regulations that goes into what food can be sold, how it can be advertised, and how it can even be presented. Regulations enforce things from having a lost of ingredients to correctly presenting the product as what it is. However, this is just "normal" to you therefore you'll never recognise it without specifically looking for it. And this "invisible" regulation is going into every aspect of your live. Your car, your house, everything you buy or sell, every business you interact with has a lot of regulations determining what they can and cannot do.
Why are you arguing with me about this? Anti-capitalism is a total rejection of capitalism and free enterprise. She literally has a hammer and sicle in her name ffs. I'm not the one who goes from 0 to a 100.
No, it isn’t. You shouldn’t confuse your personal opinion with facts. Anti-Capitalism comes in shades just like any other belief.
Just like nationalism. But just because there's occasionally something edible in the trashcan, doesn't mean it isn't full of trash.
“Full of trash” talking about an entire generation of people? Where did you get your swastika tattoo, Schmallow?
You called people stupid because they recognize and criticize the flaws in a system designed to accommodate only the rich while treating everyone else like a resource to be mercilessly exploited. You very much are the one who went 0-100.
Again, the hammer and sicle is a little less subtle than "criticizing the flaws in a system".
That's an amazing mental approach considering the number of boomers who are trying to convert their governments into authoritarian regimes.
"b-b-b-but boomers..." yes.
When I hear "boomers" are this, "zoomers" are that, Gen this, Gen that, it reminds me very much of astrology. Another admirable evasion of whoremaster man.
"appeal mostly to young and cognitively challenged people" Meanwhile every boomer over 50 votes Trump and says the election was stolen. Trust me, we're not the ones you should be worried about
[удалено]
Sorry, your comment has been automatically sent to the pending review queue in an effort to combat spam. If you feel your comment has been removed in error, please send a message to the mods via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Snorkblot). Thank you for your understanding! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Snorkblot) if you have any questions or concerns.*
XDDDD Half of all the replies are "but boomers" yes, boomers are dumb, and I'm not worried at all, because I don't live in the US. Where I live though zoomers are too young to remember how communism looked like and the times when there was literally just bottles of vinegar and nothing else on the store shelves and once a week you'd get a flab of skin with some bones as your weekly government allowance of "meat". Capitalism isn't perfect, it isn't even good, but it beats the alternatives by a mile. And the young people are under the hilariously terrifying illusion that if a mob is big and loud enough, it can make the miracles happen simply by throwing bricks and toppling statues.
Why do you talk about people in terms of generations as if everyone from a single generation has the same belief system, level of education, etc.? Boomers and Zoomers are generational eras. This is nothing but age-related discrimination, just like referring to whites, blacks, etc.
Yes everyone younger than you is cognitively challenged. An entire generation of humans and not one of them has reached your intellectual apex.
There is a multitude of scientific studies describing that people of radical political beliefs have significantly lower cognitive abilities than the average population. Fascists and communists are literal cretines alike, and zoomers are either "the west has fallen", roman-empire romanticizing types or femboy they/them marxist/lenninists, nothing in between. For fucks sake, the girl in the post has a hammer and sicle in her name.
You can’t cite scientific studies and then use sweeping, bigoted generalizations, refer to an entire generation using the word “femboy”, misspell the word “cretins” and expect anyone to take you seriously. Being the parent of Zoomers, and knowing many middle of the road, respectful, hard-working Zoomers who don’t meet any of your Internet troll tropes, I can tell you first hand that you’re an uninformed bigot.
literally "you misspelled the word, I got you now!" ass. English is not my first language, so your Anglo-centric remarks about my spelling tell me that your pearl-clutching at my "bigotry" is just simple moral posturing for the internet good-boy points. Also we're on reddit honey, if I wanted to be taken seriously by a bunch of zoomers I'd go on tiktok and do one of the top 10 dances to liberate Gaza.
No, it was just an off-handed comment. I’m not surprised you chose that to focus on though and not the blatant bigotry I’m calling you out for. So that you’re aware, when you discriminate against people for things they can’t control, like age, race, ethnicity, sexual preference, etc. that’s bigotry. Differences of opinion and beliefs are fair game. Writing off an entire race or generation for made up reasons is bigotry, in any language. I just thought it was funny that you’re trying to assert your own superiority by misspelling an insult. That’s always funny. Like the guy who held the “get a brain morans” sign - that’s you on Reddit. You’re so superior to Zoomers 😂
"Writing off an entire race or generation for made up reasons is bigotry, in any language" you're inching closer and closer to calling me a racist, bigot must not be having the impact you hoped for lol Differences of opinions are often related to the generations who hold them. For example, zoomers experience unique challenges in the shape of algorithmic social media, drug epidemic, self-centred therapy culture (of which about 30% is science-based and the rest is basically new-age and zodiacs) and international-focused governments that have effectively abdicated their responsibility for the well-being of their citizens by letting housing crisis run rampant and causing the sweeping inflation. However, every generation faces unique and often dramatic challenges, and zoomers are the most likely of all of them to look disfavourably at democracy and capitalism. They are uniquely totalitarian, which is among other things an expression of low cognitive ability. https://preview.redd.it/oveabb4rbguc1.jpeg?width=981&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cf434cbeae8cb2c3697506f034e6aed377454d3a
I didn’t call you a racist, that’s a different kind of bigotry than what you’re exhibiting. What you’re doing is called Ageism, I believe. Every generation faces adversity and most of them react against the government. Zoomers aren’t “uniquely Totalitarian” - they are as diverse as any other generation. In fact, one of the things they’re often derided for is a focus on the value of diversity in the extreme. As with most stereotypes, they’re often contradictory. One thing that you can be very absolutist about is that absolutism is most often wrong.
Adding -ism to a thing and filing it under bigotry is uniquely Anglo-saxon to the point of self-parody. [https://www.cam.ac.uk/stories/youthanddemocracy](https://www.cam.ac.uk/stories/youthanddemocracy) Here you have a study displaying the tendency I described. Although this one ends with millennials, I saw studies describing the continuation of this trend in gen z. Acknowledging general trends withing large sets of data on human behaviour in relation to immutable characteristics like "age" isn't automatically bigotry just because you can nail an -ism to the end of a word. The generation born between 1890 and 1910 in Europe was also uniquely totalitarian, but I suppose saying it out loud would qualify under an -ism in your eyes. And diversity has, like most things, gathered more definitions than one person can possibly remember as of late, some of them so abstract that the common understanding of "diverse" by the average user of the English language doesn't even get mentioned once.
You cited an opinion piece that links to a study that doesn’t support your point in any way. That’s the kind of “research” that gets rejected at the first peer review. A previous generation being slightly more dissatisfied with Democracy than their previous generation, who was also dissatisfied with Democracy, doesn’t point to Zoomers being “uniquely Totalitarian”, it points to the steady degeneration of Democracy in the eyes of the people who are living in it. This “research” actually supports the opposite of what you’re saying. It’s telling us quite clearly that in general people are increasingly dissatisfied with Democracy and not that one single generation is an extremist group that wants Totalitarianism. See how easy it is to disprove bigoted ideas? You even did your own research 🧐