Capitalism vs Marxism

As stated in Dressner's text, sustainability can be defined as the "non-depletion of capital." Many people who are for Marxism or through more commonly used terms such as socialism would argue that socialism's main roots come from the inability for capitalism to solve humanity's problems. Many people who think this way feel there are certain limits to the natural environment, and if we are not careful, they will be reached sooner rather than later. In the introduction of Dressner's text, it is stated that "resources have to be shared so that there is enough for everybody, both now and in the future." It then goes on to state that sustainability in this way has a lot in common with socialism. While there are many pros to maintaining resources and making sure there is enough for everyone, the are many cons to the idea also. There are higher costs associated with socialism and a bigger government influence on the people of the nation. Also, there is less room for growth with socialism with more controlled factors.

On the other hand stands capitalism. With capitalism you gain all of the perks socialism does not have with sustainability, while gaining all of its flaws also. You receive less government regulations and more room for growth, development and the eventually growth of capital. With capitalism though, there are not as many consequences of taking actions. As stated in Dressner, "a society that does not take into account the repercussions of its transformation of nature can hardly be said to dominate nature at all. While both capitalism and socialism have there pros and cons, I think what keeps society keep evolving are both working together. Because of these differing ideas, both keep the nation maturing in terms of sustainability, while bringing new and innovative ideas in other fields of thought.