Why is capitalism well suited or not well suited to protect and conserve resources?

Question

Why is capitalism well suited or not well suited to protect and conserve resources?

Answer 1

A good question.  I'd have to say that capitalism--unregulated--isn't well suited t o conservation--though it occassionally does so pruely as a means of sustaining profitable resources.

But, at the same time, that's sort of an absolute judgement.  If you view capitalism in comparision to other systems, it does a far better job.  If you look at the record of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact nations, for example, it makes the worst of Western environmental carelessness look like the soul of responsibility.  Currently, China (which despite its pretensions is still a socialist, not a capitalist country, as far as national policy goes) is riding roughshod over even the most obvious environmental considerations.

Answer 2

Whether it is capitalism or communism doesn't matter.  We give value to articles based on the value of the human labour it takes to create them.  So long as we over value our personal contribution and under value the contribution of nature, no current economic or political theory is well suited to protect and conserve nature.

The only theory I have seen that gives us an opportunity to live in harmony with planet Earth is Deep Ecology.  I believe the only religion/politics/economics that will ensure our continuing survival as a species is Deep Ecosocial Egalitarianism.  It is a title I made up, but look up the words and I think you'll get the general idea.