I will wait for humans to decide to feed hungry children.

There is no careful use of language that can stop people from preferring hatred. Humans are machines for making the world worse, and they will continue to do so, and while they do it they will rationalise doing it, and while people get hurt (including themselves) they will blame the victims.

“It’s not fascism!” they complain as minorities are scapegoated and children die. Just get used to the fact that anything that is pointed entirely towards harming people for fun and profit is going to attract a range of derogatory words, and maybe think about how to stop humans from hurting humans instead.

I’ll pick not being a dick to strangers online, thanks.

I already have enough of me to go around.

Methinks perhaps the International Business Times may value capitalism over quality of life.

I think capitalism tends to be valued over life in general.

That is incredibly niche.

No, that’s you thinking you’re funny when you troll so poorly.

I’m sure 99.999% of the population

Are more amusing than you.

leading you to understand things

I don’t understand anything. Therefore I have no ideology.

You have failed to show that it is an ideology. You have explained that you disagree with it, but that’s not the same thing.

It’s an empirical fact that living beings don’t like being hurt. Therefore, it avoiding hurt is good. That’s not an ideology, it’s reasoning based on observable facts. An ideological position would be “we need to hurt living beings to further our interests”. The ideological position involves those interests.

Seeing all living beings as equal (e.g. in terms of prioritising not harming them, just as I would prefer not to be harmed or to harm myself) is about not having an interest, and therefore is clearly not ideological. It’s also objectively true, because in terms of cosmological time, the consequences of all living beings become equal.

Will me being infantile stop humans from hurting each other? If not, why would I be motivated to change?

Will me growing up (to stop being infantile) get in the way of my refraining from hurting others? If yes, why would I be motivated to change?

In my infantile state, I can clearly see that - even in a complex world - harming other living beings is wrong. I don’t like being harmed, so why would they like being harmed?

Maybe you need ideology to simplify the world. But that doesn’t mean that I require it. That’s part of the complex world you assert we live in, yes?

It is an objective fact that a harmful act harms someone. That one observer likes that outcome does not alter the objective moral weight of the act. Harmful acts are objectively wrong, regardless of preference.

From a basic empirical observation of the effects of harm, one can arrive at a moral system based on objective reasoning. In this way, ideology can be avoided.

Two different people can disagree on whether a table is a table: this does not alter objective fact.

The idea that objectivity requires a God figure would seem to me to be Berkeleyan idealism.

There is no inherent objective truth to these value questions.

I disagree. These values are based on objective observations.

I’m autistic.

The dictionary definition.

I’m open to trying a non-Capitalist system, but I’m pretty sure hierarchical bullshit will happen and the majority will end up being exploited.

Whether anyone else is open to it before humans extinguish themselves, I don’t know.

I’m not a fan of ideology.

The root problem is human ideology. I do not know if we can have humans without ideology.

My toilet definitely has cause to remember my shits.

I hate terrorism. Therefore I hate Hamas, who are terrorists. And therefore I hate a state which uses terrorism to clear land, which Israel is doing: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/16/magazine/israel-west-bank-settler-violence-impunity.html