They are saying "our theoretical world would be much better than your real world, but you have to just trust us."
As Upton Sinclair observed, it is difficult to get a person to understand something when their salary depends on their not understanding it. Those who are comfortable under the current system are not inclined to see its problems.
Are you saying that there was no underbelly of poverty and unrest prior to some point in time when capitalism became dominant? When do you see the approximate start of capitalism? 17th c? earlier? later? Did it originate in Northwestern Europe?
This is quite a misunderstanding of the points at play here. The Marxist critique of capitalism is precisely that it operates the same way as these precapitalist formations where the connection between the wealth of elites and the poverty of common people was obvious. The critique has force exactly because pro-capitalist ideologues imagine that capitalism is somehow different from (and clearly morally superior to) precapitalist social formations.
The other problem of course, which isn't so much a contradiction of capitalism, is the concept of discounting the future. tl;dr Angst is exactly right that, at least as incentives exist under capitalism, you always take $1000 now from torching the planet over $1000 you get later because you spent $1000 now on preserving the planet.
Not really Communism was articulated in the 19th century mostly as a result of the conditions of the IR when Marx came up with it.
The redistribution of land and cancellation of debts was the demand of almost every single peasant uprising in the Old World for something like 4500 years before Marx was born.
Capitalism has a huge incentive to tackle rising seas and global warming.
No, it has incentive to ignore both of these issues because the costs are largely externalized from the actors who have the decision-making power. Which is exactly the problem, and with climate change we can now add the most bitter contradiction of all, one that
@Angst notes accurately Marx did not foresee, which is that climate change and other environmental problems means that there is a very real sense in which no capitalist economic activity is actually possible without externalizing the costs. If the true costs of emitting CO2 were properly borne by the emitters, we would be living in a pre-industrial world because no one would ever have invested in a coal-powered engine in the first place.
2.0 is filling a tooth cavity. BAU is waiting for the abscess.
We hope 2.0 is filling a tooth cavity, anyway. We're not really sure.
Fair market price. I like that one. That seems to work fine in families, yup! It's the "you are communists with me now" that seems to create the problems, and for not totally unrelated reasons that it's a problem when you inform people that they're in your family now, "Congratulations, wife. From each according to thier ability."
