I found a web page, anticapitalismfaq where is arguments about what is wrong with capitalism and that it should be thrown away and be replaced with better system.
You definitely should go and read it yourself and don't just take my word what it is about since there can be misunderstanding on my side and therefore I can explain wrongly what they have meant on that site.
Also it is better anyway read it yourself what they are talking about than just blindly trust some other person telling you what it is all about. I mean, if you don't know me, how you can trust me in the first place? What if my intentions were totally flawed and I just want to make anti capitalist look bad and be a spokeperson for the capitalistic system because I benefit somehow from it? So please, make yourself a favor and read that Anti-Capitalism FAQ site. It is very fast to read and then you can make your opinion better if I write anything what makes sense or not.
That site is of course not the only place where you can hear anti-capitalism. I also have heard quite often arguments against capitalism on other context as well and how the socialism or communism is better way to go. Also when I was younger I had much more similar thoughts as well personally, so it is not totally strange opinion for me either.
Since later I have changed my views and nowadays I would call me a capitalist I thought that it would be better to do some kind of counter argumenting on the arguments against capitalism.
You can read my arguments, read those other arguments as well why you should be anti capitalist and then make up your mind yourself if anything what I talk about makes no sense or not. You can agree with me or you can disagree with me, partly or fully. It does not matter - more important thing is to try to understand different kind of worldviews and therefore have perspective about why some people think they way they think.
The text on anticapitalismfaq starts with a strong statement: "Capitalism cannot exist without poverty, oppression, war, and ecological destruction."
I have to disagree, fully. Capitalism CAN exists without poverty. It is not necessary to have oppression neither wars to have a capitalistic system and there is no any kind of reason why it should lead to ecological destruction.
Yes, it is possible that there is oppression, poverty, wars and ecological issues on capitalistic countries, but it is not because of the capitalist system. There has been wars in communistic countries, there is still poverty in communistic countries - so why then there is wars or poverty on countires like China, Cuba and Laos for example?
In Cuba "Approximately 26 percent of Cuba's population is living in poverty" source. In China "around 13% of its population falling below this poverty line of $5.50 per day in 2020." source and in Laos "Nearly 23% of the total population of 7.2 million people in Laos are below the poverty line" source. So if the capitalism is the source and reason of poverty, why in communism they can not fix povery so easily? Or do we just assume that those countries are not "real communism" and that is the issue, or is poverty issue on those countries because other countries are causing issues on those communistic countries?
Of course I agree that reason can be that western countries causes issues on those communistic countries and therefore their economy cannot grow and they have no possibility to fully embrace the communism, but since I have not spent time investigation those socio-economical issues on those countries I have no much to say if that is the case or not.
Same thing could also be said on capitalism how it would end all the issues; poverty would be no an issue if there would be more easy ways for people to start own company and sell things without governments trying to regulate too much things and make things complicated. Then there would be more open jobs and there would be more people making money enough to pay food, apartments and with less taxation there would be more money for every worker and they could more easily give money to Red Cross, Unicef etc. to solve those issues of the poverties.
In my point of view, both arguments against or forth are just too naive and simplified and those works only in imagination when we do not have to worry and take in count real life problems.
There has been wars in communistic countries as well. Anti-Capitalism does not solve these issues, or at least I think so. Issues what causes wars are much more deeper in humanity and it does not matter if we have capitalistic, socialistic or communistic country. Some people are greedy anyway and want more than they should have and therefore that can cause war.
Also not all wars are about the owning more. Sometimes it is because of religious reasons or at least that can be used as a explanation even tho the reason might be just a political one.
My point is, wars are not automatically reason for the capitalism. You can have a capitalistic system and you do not need to go for war because of it. You also can have communistic country and still you can have wars. Reasons for wars are not that black and white and they have much deeper reasons than just a economical ones.
One of the statements of the anti-capitalism is that capitalism cannot exist without oppression. That is as true as saying that communism cannot exist without oppression.
Oppression happens in a form or another in many places and in many cultures and it is not because of capitalism/communism/socialism. Oppression have so many reason behind it so making it a statement that capitalistic system needs an oppression is just a naivity. People who oppress others might have mental issues, they might have broken childhood what causes them to search feeling of power in oppressing others etc. and it is not related to economical system directly.
Of course issues rise when rich oppress the poor, but it is not solved to make communism since oppression is much more a psychological problem and it has so many reasons behind it. If we just take one possible reason (money) as a reason we are not solving anything, we are just living in populistic utopia where we ignore the realities and complexity of life. And also, in communistic countries there is poverty as well so if the lack of money would cause the issue of oppression then it would be just changed to situation where another poor is oppressing another poor.
In anticapitalismfaq it was said also that capitalism cannot exist without ecological destruction which I of course disagree, like on those all other arguments. There is no any reason why capitalism itself is the root of the ecological destruction. It is humans who makes economical destruction, not the money system itself.
I would even argue that if we could make better capitalistic system there would be much more jobs with good enough salaries so people have more money to spend and therefore people would not buy lots of unethically produced crap from poor countries where economical issues are not taken in consideration at all.
Surely that same could be said about the communistic country - if there would be job for everyone with good enough salary that would also lead to better outcome for ecology since then everybody would have money to buy stuff that is not made in poor countries.
In the end I do not believe this is outcome of capitalism and it would not fix anything if we just go for communism. Only way to fix this kind of problems probably would be wanting less and buying less materialistic possessions.
Note that I say here materialistic possessions. You know, you can have a capitalistic system where you do not produce any materialistic goods except what is necessary for living.
For example, you can be a singer and sing only live for live audience somehwere local place where you can go by walking and you can get money for your performance. There you have made money with your own work without ruining environment.
You can also be a poet who read poems out loud in excange for money and there you are still working in capistalistc system without ruining environment. You can teach others as well and get paid and you do not need to ruin environment etc. etc. etc.
Also you can buy a small plant in the middle of nowhere cheaply and live your life there, grow your own food etc. and still be in a capitalic system without need for ruining the environment.
My point is that it is not the capistalism what is ruining the environment but the choices people make. For example if we give people choice to buy unethically produced stuff from a factory that ruins waters it is not the reason of capitalism - that could as easily happen from communistic country.
In communism that would be impossible to fix unless the government wants to do something about it since you could not just start a new factory what works ethically since you are not allowed to have own private companies. In capitalism at least you could start own company what produces things ethically and therefore you can be try to change world better.
Since this text is already quite long I will not go at this moment at least deeper to that page and its arguments and explain step by step all what I think is wrong in it. Mostly my argument against that text is anyway that it has black and white thinking where all the complex issues are because of capitalism even tho issues have much deeper reasons.
Many of the issues in current capitalistic societies what are also criticized in that text as well is not because of capitalism but more likely because of humans and their behaviour. It would be not fixed just changing the capitalism to communism since root issues would stay and outcome would still be bad. Surely outcome would be quite probably different, but not likely any better. There is always people who would want to steal, somebody who would be lazy and manipulate others to do work for him and some people would spend less money and some spend more money and in the future some would again be poorer than others because of their behaviours.
Of course you should not read that previous sentence thinking that I mean that poor people are poor because they have bad behaviours. I am not saying that. Life is so complex and it would be naive to make assumptions like that and count poor people as a group who will have all same kind of mindset and life and life sitatutions. Every life story is unique. What I mean instead is that even if we would change to communism then in the future there still would be rich and poor if they own money or any exchangeable or storeable asset in the first place. Some use money less and some use money more and therefore it would lead that in 10 years some have money saved and others do not have anything.
I think personally that much bigger issue and reason for many issues in the first place is the current money system - not the capitalism nor the communism.
Currently money can be created from nothing by banks and then except people to pay it back with interests. That will lead in some point automatically to issues since there is not enough money to pay loans and their interests back. Also it will cause a need for a growth since there will always be inflation what will make you lose value of the money and you will need to make more of it to pay your bills, buy food etc.
Since that money system would be too long rant to write about here I will end this post here. Hopefully you have got at least some food for the thought.
And remember - you do not need to agree with me. Think and analyze if anything I have written makes any sense and make up your own mind. Keep what is worth keeping in my thoughts (if any) and forget others.