Yes, “moderates”.
Those of us who realize the building we all live in is old, has holes in the windows and floors, and never had an elevator installed, but would still prefer to renovate it than burn it down. Yes, we know some people are getting wet, or fell through the floor, and a few can’t even get to their rooms, but the majority of us are warm, well-fed, and mildly entertained. We definitely need to get the holes patched and we should work on some sort of lift, but burning the place down is not going to help those who are missing out now and will harm everyone else in the process.
You know that they tear down dilapidated buildings with good reason, right? The foundation is crumbling, the floor won’t support weight and the roof is more leak than barrier.
Trying to apply repairs to a crumbling and unsafe building is actually a great analogy for how your “moderate” bullshit is keeping most of society in a death spiral. Nice self-own.
Even if we are approaching a point where a tear down would be more cost effective, we are not at a point where we can unite enough to rebuild anything from the rubble.
Maybe pushing it any farther is risking a collapse, but I rather like being one united nation sitting at the top of lists for economic and military power, rather than 3 or 4 smaller nations barely in the top 10.
We are way past the point where a tear down is necessary to save millions of lives, never mind “cost effective”.
sitting at the top of lists for economic and military power
You KNOW that all that economic power belongs to the rich and the rest are poorer than most western countries, right?
Also, celebrating military power as a virtue is some North Korea type shit, not something a modern democracy should be doing.
Bruh, in your analogy where are you getting the money and materials to patch up the building? It’s being hoarded by the guy that owns a giant state of the art mansion up the street that needs 0 repairs.
And that mansion has TWO elevators.
Fair question.
In my hastily put together analogy, the rich guy would live up on the top floor which he converted to a pent house, probably with a helicopter pad. That guy like in real life is going to try to squeeze the money out of the guys a few floors down from himself. If it actually comes to a building collapse or something catastrophic, he probably tries to escape to another building.
Really though, this analogy is probably stretched to its limit.
Why wouldn’t he escape before the building got that bad? Why wouldn’t he escape the first time someone fell through the floor?
Or you could build a new and better building instead of patching up poor construction.
Sure, if you can get most of the residents to agree on what kind of building they want the new one to be, you might even make it happen fairly smoothly.
As is, we have at least a half a dozen groups who each want different designs and the two largest groups aren’t even sure they want to live in the same building anymore. Those two groups have already started drawing lines down the middle of the current building and are demanding everyone pick a side. To make matters worse the other groups don’t agree with each other enough to even band together for their own defense. In the end, we will be lucky if we get a couple small condos where once a sky-rise stood.
There is no reforming capitalism, and by pretending there is (or that “the alternative” which you are clearly not even able to articulate, is worse) you are helping to maintain the status quo, at best.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/10/14/liberalism-and-fascism-partners-in-crime/
https://libcom.org/article/capitalist-democracy-illusion-choice