Let’s say you’re a slave master in what most people understand as the historical stereotype of slavery, what does that entail?
- You own people as property;
- They have no rights;
- You can do anything you want to them;
- The expenses of keeping them alive and fit to work are your expenses;
— so how is this any different from capitalism, if the only difference is that you give them that money so they can pay those expenses themselves? Ok, there’s a few more differences than that, but it’s still slavery.
In a socialist democracy under capitalist economics, sure you can vote, and if your job pays well enough you can go on holidays and buy other treats for yourself, but I never said that EVERYONE was a slave under capitalism, I only said that capitalism is the normalisation of slavery.
Continue reading “Capitalism: the normalisation of slavery”
More than a decade ago, maybe as much as 2 decades ago I heard of some European automobile manufacturers taking responsibility for the materials used in their vehicles, by way of recalling all end of life vehicles and recycling every single component. Now I don’t know how accurate the story was, as it was second hand information at best when I received it, and I can’t even remember where I heard it. But it gave me an idea.
More than 5 years ago I started suggesting ( and publishing ) the idea that manufacturers should be made to show technical cause for the use of any and all non-biodegradable and/or toxic materials — ie: they should be required to show that materials are chosen for technical not economic reasons, so that the best materials for the job are used, even if something else is cheaper, where those cheaper options are toxic and/or non-biodegradable — as this would ensure the maximisation of materials innovation for biodegradable and non-toxic options.
Continue reading “Yet more evidence capitalism will fail to achieve sustainability”