• But that’s entirely a problem of distribution of goods stemming from the predominant mode of economic organisation. Not building a larger particle collider would solve exactly zero problems which stem from capitalist distribution of goods and resulting artificial scarcity.

    • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sure. But that doesn’t change people being upset that this is prioritised over living standards and lifestyles. People want that solved first and that’s a perfectly ok emotion to be having that shouldn’t be chastised.

      The thing to push is that with capitalism is that they would rather fund this than feed and house people, because not feeding people is the point, by design. Even if this is unprofitable, it’s still a thing they’d prefer to spend on than feed or house people.

    • ComradeRat [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Is there a world in which clearing land of animals, people, etc to make room for mines, extracting tons of ore from the ground, shipping(very harmful in and of itself in this society) it to a second place (cleared, etc) to be forged (at high temperatures requiring some energy source shipped from a third place (cleared etc)) and then shipping it to a fourth place (cleared, etc) to be built into a giant energy-consumer for perpetuity won’t be harmful?