Capitalism is Immoral

1. Capitalism destroys the environment.Capitalism is without a doubt the most productive economic system ever created. Capitalism, throughout history, has required an ever increasing level of natural resources to sustain itself. To quote Abramsky, Fellow at the Institute of Advanced Studies in Science, Technology and Society: " The current worldwide system of production is based on endless growth and expansion, which is simply incompatible with a long term reduction in emissions and energy consumption. Despite the fact that localized and punctual moments of reduction may well still occur, the overall energy consumption and emissions of the system as a whole can only increase[1]."Thus Capitalism is unable to break free from the status quo of industrialization and environmental pollution. In fact it has only to contribute to the crisis. So what then are the impacts of status quo "worldwide system of production" on the environment?A. Climate change at this point has considerable evidence to support Anthropogenic involvement. Indeed one can no longer claim, with any basis in scientific fact, that climate change is a purely natural event, outside of human agency. The following chart is provided by the OSS Foundation: The impacts of climate change on biodiversity are unparalleled by any other disaster in recorded history. A wide variety of projections have been made by experts on the topic: The Nature Conservancy claims as much as 1/4 of ALL species on earth are at risk for extinction[2]. Depending on the projection used these figures range as high as 80/70% and as low as >10%. Regardless of the model used, I challenge Con and the voters to find a model supported by mainstream science that which concludes biodiversity is affected by climate change.B. further evidence of the negative impact of the industrialized capitalist era can be found in deforestation trends. E.O. Wilson, Harvard sociobiologist, in The Future of life posits that a sharp increase in Global deforestation occurred around 1852(during the industrialization of Capitalist Europe and America in the 1800's). By his estimates, 80% of All old growth forests will be wiped out. This is without a doubt human agency and the data supports that the capitalist system has deeply worsened this trend. I doubt severely that tribal collectivists and other groups outside of the capitalist system were responsible for this sharp change. Here is a chart that shows US old growth forests from the "Atlas of the Historical Geography of the United States": Unless Con wishes to contest that this was indeed not the result of Capitalism in America, but rather natural phenomena or the actions of tribal Native Americans then we must conclude that rapid global deforestation is the result of the Capitalist system.Why the destruction of the environment is a moral matter is simple. In fact it can be rendered morally repugnant in numerous models of morality, I will outline 2.~Species rights: Genocide, the intentional wiping out of ethnic groups is outlawed by international law and near universally condemned. What then gives the right, nor the ethical reasoning to intentionally exploit and wipe out the rest of the animal kingdom? This is totally unacceptable. Does one not treat ethically their pets? Yet on what grounds can we advocate for the intentional genocide on thousands of species. The degree to which Capitalism has exploited and wiped out plants/animals indicates a system of true moral repugnance.~"Stewards of Creation" To those voters who posses morality based on the Abrahamic religions and believe in a god given superiority of animals, I would like to point out that nature is creation. Therefor the destruction of the natural world for profit, is the very apex of Man's arrogance to God. Thus you must vote in accord with Capitalism as an immoral economic system.2. Capitalism exploits WorkersExploitation: The action or fact of treating someone unfairly in order to benefit from their work.All born into this world are free, yet most of us grew up in chains, as the Jacobin once posited.All property(with few exceptions) is owned by either a nation state or private individual in the Capitalist system. Meaning that all resources are owned, as well as the means in which to produce them. Those who have private control over the means of production, are in a naturally exploitative relationship over those who lack it. Consider I played the capitalist game right and now I - along with others like me- own the vast majority of the wealth(capital) and property. Now Con is born into this world, he graduates high school and is now a member of the working class. Now he gets to enter the world of the voluntary free market! He really has two choices: work for a private corporation -like mine- or be without the ability to produce(mooch, vagabond, starvation). If all the property is owned and all the resources within them, and additionally the means to produce material goods(factories, farms, bakeries, etc) then how may Con opt out?He really cannot, this is where the exploitation really begins. But lets zoom out, as those of us in WEIRD (Western Educated Industrialized Rich Democratic) nations do not do much of the producing. Therefor the conditions of labor in which he is subjected to, which are still exploitative is nothing near what the capitalist system does to labor involved in production. CIA World Factbook 2006 via Stephen Morley Green=Industry Blue=Service. I want to point out that all nation states with the exception of Laos, Cuba and arguably North Korea operate within the confines of a capitalist market economy.Let us consider the following thought experiment, based on the "Original Position" of Oxford Fellow John Rawls. The purpose of this thought experiment is to determine what in a society is just and what is unjust:We have been tasked with determining a new society for humanity to live in and then we shall be born into this new world. But there is a catch: You will not get to choose your gender, economic standing, ethnicity or kin. You may be anyone.You would naturally want, at least for yourself, guarantee of adequate living conditions and the access to earn a living wage. If one posits that they would like to be born into a society with the two aforementioned attributes then Capitalism is most definitely the system you do not wish to pursue.To quote Professor James Davies "Income inequality has been rising for the past 20 to 25 years and we think that is true for inequality in the distribution of wealth.[3]"Additionally the same article yields:" the richest 1 percent of adults - most of whom live in Europe or the United States - owned 40 percent of global assets."Meaning that the world capitalist system is one of massive, and polarizing inequity.To frame this another way, under the social contract of Capitalism, you may be born into a family-not to mention region- with little capital and thus forced to labor and produce for society. Others in this socio-economic system inherit the means of production and a far greater level of capital. They can and will profit of your labor.J. Greene of Harvard found in a study that human beings make moral choices via cost-benefit analysis[4].Capitalism bears billions into this world with minute capital and the few profit off these impoverished masses.The benefit off the few are outweighed by the suffering of the many.Capitalism is immoral.Now I shall turn it over to Con, I await his opening statement with anticipation.~Alex1. "Kolya, Sparking a Worldwide Energy Revolution: Social Struggles in the Transition to a Post-Petrol World" Pg. 7-92. http://www.nature.org...3. http://www.denverpost.com...4.http://www.npr.org...