this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2026
385 points (90.4% liked)

Science Memes

19700 readers
1154 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lmmarsano@group.lt -5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Specifically billionaires/unchecked capitalists

The easy scapegoat oversimplifies the problem, which goes beyond & predates capitalism. Though exterminating all of humanity is one way to achieve sustainability, it doesn't necessarily require it. So far, however, humanity has reached living standards beyond subsistence only by consuming resources at unsustainable levels faster than the planet can replenish, and that has been true regardless of economic system. Even when living at subsistence levels, humanity has likely caused mass extinction events.

From a comment to a similar post

People here tend to fixate on their pet theories that scapegoat capitalism for everything including that humanity's drain on ecological resources exceeds Earth's rate of regeneration without acknowledging that their alternatives don't address the problem, either.

Although governments are far more able than individuals and firms acting singly to take action to protect the environment, they often fail to do so. The centrally planned economies of Eastern Europe, where governments controlled production, had a particularly poor record on pollution control. Per capita mortality from air pollution in Eastern Europe (outside the EU) and China remains high relative to the EU and North America.

In particular, the Soviet economy—with constitutional guarantees to continuously improve living standards & steadily grow productive forces—caused disproportionately worse ecological damage than the US's. All economic systems have the same capacity to degrade the environment & deplete stocks of natural resources. Without adequate policies to protect the environment, improving & maintaining living standards with the continuous economic growth necessary to do that threatens the environment.

Moreover, human activity before capitalism has led to extinctions of megafauna, plants, & animals dependent on those plants. The quaternary megafauna extinction was likely driven by overhunting by humans. Those extinctions & increased fires coinciding with the arrival of humanity to Australia transformed the ecosystem from mixed rainforest to drier landscapes. Aboriginal landscape burning

may have caused the extinction of some fire-sensitive species of plants and animals dependent upon infrequently burnt habitats

More recently, they killed off the elephant bird likely due to major environmental alterations & overconsumption of their eggs.

Until humanity starts living sustainably, they are the problem.

[–] Allero@lemmy.today 13 points 2 days ago

A socialist society can be ecologically devastating. But, unlike capitalist one, it doesn't have to be.

Capitalism pursues infinite growth in a finite world. As long as unsustainable practices deliver you more (which is extremely often the case) - they will be pursued, and if you block them all, it will cripple the economy as it will lower the expectation of profit. Capitalism breeds practices like planned obsolescence, aggressive marketing and tracking to fuel overconsumption, it promotes a lavish lifestyle - all to ensure the monetary flow necessary to keep such economy afloat.

Socialist society is more adaptive in this regard. You can ramp up production and overconsumption, Earth be damned, or you can slow down and invest in long-term, sustainable solutions, even at the expense of short-term returns. The latter, however, means getting less competitive internationally, which is exactly the sacrifice the socialist countries of the past, including USSR, were not willing to make.

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

'Someone tried once and did it wrong, so it must be impossible. 🤷‍♂️"

[–] lmmarsano@group.lt 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Cool vibes, lack of data, & copium.

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Nice Oxford comma! Unnice lack of contribution