there's a bot that will do this for you over on lemmy.world. i think you'd like it better over there.

Given that the environmental depredation of this planet is driven by […] can people explain why they believe that without capitalism

capitalist industry and commerce have been the driving force of the mass extinction of the last 500 years[0][1][2]. climate change didn't begin until the late 1800s with the rise of tycoons, and accelerated with mass production in the mid-1900s.

for a current example: datacentres are wasting entire regional electricity and water supplies on investment grifter bullshit. because it makes money. it doesn't even turn a real profit, and it's not everyday people paying for it.

can people explain why they believe that without capitalism everyone would be […]

could be, not necessarily would. because a humanistic, socialised means of production would: allow for truly 'democratic' control over what is produced; remove nested interests and subsidies to overgrown polluting industries[3]; and make alternatives viable without the need to bend or break to top-down market pressures and monetary policy dictated by dragons.

I also assume they’re wearing hemp and have no interest in fashion.

capitalism has existed for less than 300 years. consumerism has existed for less than 100 years. when you have an economic system which emphasises the independent individual — simultaneously a motivator and a mere cog in the machine — and posits that the mere potential to own things is the source of value: buying wasteful, exotic, unnecessary shit is a way to define yourself and your status. it's called conspicuous consumption, and it happens from the micro to the macro in the lower and the upper classes, and there's top-down pressure to do so to keep currency current.

i recommend the documentary The Century of the Self for an overview of the commodification of identity and culture.

Keep in mind there are 8 billion people on this planet, so presumably they wouldn’t be having children either.

we are already producing enough food to sufficiently feed 1.5x the world population[4], and could continue to do so even within planetary boundaries[5] with changes to economic policy and the adoption of less profitable methods of agriculture.

i didn't cover everything here, because i recommend:

1. the book Less Is More.
2. familiarising yourself with the concept of the superstructure; it's a very helpful analytical tool.
3. going back to the last time you were on your malthusian debatebro bullshit and really trying to engage your imagination with much of the same arguments made there.

as Cowbee wrote: the 'free market' narrative assumes the market is participatory, and that you can simply opt out ('go live in the woods').

but capitalism doesn't work without a labour market, and the labour market isn't stable without a buffer of un[der]employment. so living outside the market — and general 'propertylessness' — is criminalised or made so inconvenient/unsustainable that you're left with 'the choice' between peonage or starvation. the people who fall into homelessness and houselessness serve as a warning to anyone who might consider 'opting out'.

i don't think anyone genuinely believes this is a real choice, but i've experienced this narrative being used to dismiss critiques of capitalism and wage slavery.

what does this have to do with houseless people?

All the time spent thinking how to solve a problem is also work.

try telling that to every manager i've ever had.

my guess is it was trying to get you to help one of its friends or something.

that was my first guess, but it didn't seem like it was leading me anywhere.

i'm a little worried now.

I’d have had a good search around the area befriending crows can actually bring you some benifit like shiny gifts

when i was homeless, i shared my food with a crow. i got them to bring me coins by feeding them double portions when they brought monies.

or in some cases crow bodyguards as they actually recognise individuals as friends etc.

that's my current relationship to the corvids in town. a long time ago i rescued a magpie from two seagulls, and since then all the corvids no longer fly away when i come near them. the magpies even defended me from a seagull one day!

but they otherwise don't approach me, and we don't 'communicate'.

that was my first guess, but after i tried getting back on the path they only kept putting grass on my feet. i tried holding still, backing away, moving toward them, moving back into the grass, making noises, and checked in the bush — it just kept putting grass on me. i didn't immediately see anything. i was afraid of scaring or upsetting them, so i left.

someone else suggested they're a juvenile that doesn't know how to feed themself.

this assumes that:

1. all workers are 'producing' anything.
2. all workers are serving real needs.
3. the difference between supply and demand is really so low that any dip in 'productivity' would harm anything more than an executive's RoI.
4. that the threat of this financial 'harm' necessitates more work.

with the increase in 'productivity' over the last century, if we reduced our expectations, and stopped letting monopoly money run our entire society, and stopped burning surplus resources because it's 'unsold' or would drive down prices: we wouldn't need to work even 20% what is expected of us now.

this assumes that:

1. dependence is inevitable if Europe is not the most competitive.
2. that economic competitiveness had anything to do with natural gas imports.
3. that our economic system and its basic dynamics are unchangeable.
4. that our needs are unchangeable.

the natural gas situation wouldn't have been avoided if Europe were more 'competitive'; neither would any other geopolitical situation. instead the EU should have — and is currently — diversifying its domestic energy sources. the EU could also work on energy coöperation and reducing energy usage.

interdependence works for everyone. independence is a destructive mindset.

How would this work? Do websites with rss feeds normally publish the url to that feed in some standard place?

feeds are usually advertised in the page header as below, with type set to either application/rss+xml or application/atom+xml.

<head>
  <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="Example Feed" href="https://example.com/feed/" />
</head>

Are there any third party extensions that do it?

i don't know about chrom[e|ium], but i use Awesome RSS for firefox.

what is so bleak about two people exercising their autonomy to choose when and how they die together?

You need to enable JavaScript to run this app.