He’s being down voted because he had an uninformed and uncritical response to a valid point. Not because of a difference in opinion but because he entered a conversation with the sole intent of saying “not me”, clearly showing he didn’t even begin to engage in any way with the topic.

I agree with this and I should have been a little more critical in my reply to them.

It is disingenuous to call it a difference in opinion.

Apologies, this wasn’t my intention and I will try and communicate better in the future.

However, conversation is good, and I appreciate your attempt at getting him to put some more thought into the topic. It’s something I need to be better at myself rather than being snippy.

I appreciate you pointing this out and also recognising that you have room for improvement in this regard. Not too many people admit to these things.

In that spirit of conversation I do wanna say that I think focusing on different versions of capitalism misses the point of the topic as well. It isn’t about laissez faire vs more regulated systems. It’s that the incentives regardless of the specific system of capitalism seek to squeeze wealth out of every orifice. It’s a constant struggle between the oppressed being squeezed and the squeezers doing the squeezing.

What is the alternative though? As in not against learning about alternative systems. You could argue that for all of capitalisms failings it has advanced us a civilisation very quickly, whether that is a good thing or not is hard to say.

What does this have to do with feminism and whatnot? Well you see, due to the endless squeezing, men have lost the ability to do the thing they have been told their whole life to do. Provide. This has happened at the same time as women and LGBT rights becoming more and more equal. Due to this, many right wing groups prey on men’s insecurity with their lack of ability to “provide” and blame that changing world on the fact women and queer folk are more open and equal.

I agree completely with this assessment.

As if putting women in the kitchen and queer folk in the closet will revert the economic status of those men back to the time when women were forced to be in the kitchen and queer folk were forced in the closet.

It’s always been the case, not that it’s acceptable, that the media and people with power like to keep us hating each other. Class war not culture war.

This is the topic. To say to all that “I don’t hate capitalism” is to fundamentally not understand the topic at all. Conversation is good, but to conversate we need to have a common topic and a common language to communicate ideas about that topic. A language that the person you replied to does not have as shown by his non-understanding of what was even said.

This is called a false consciousness. It’s a natural outcome to oppressive systems to take people within it and give them a language incompatible with people outside of that same false consciousness. Conversation becomes difficult because what I mean by capitalism and what he means by capitalism are fundamentally different.

Both I and the article are using the academic meaning. Meanwhile he thinks we mean like, Owning a house as capitalism.

I guess this leads to the question above, what would another system look like and how would we get there.

As I said before, I need to be better at engaging people and being less snippy and just pointing and saying “your wrong and here’s why”. Meeting people where they are is my goal but I’m not quite there.

I don’t know! You have responded to me in an engaging manner and gave me food for thought and way I can communicate better online.

Anyways, good luck with your attempt. Sorry that I talked so much. Please take it with genuine love that I want to give it with.

I have ADHD, I am an expert at talking too much. 😉