If the current approach is ended, it will be replaced with something, even if that is a laissez-faire "we don't know, so just let it sort itself out" approach. Will that something result in fewer horrors than those that exist now?
The onus is definitely on the persons wanting change to make an actual case for that change. So yes, it is their responsibility to present a vision of their alternative future that I will accept.
> The onus is definitely on the persons wanting change to make an actual case for that change
No it's not. The onus is on the people who created policies that lead to massive inequality and human misery to explain why we shouldn't string them up as an example to others.
Yes, it is. Based on what you've written so far, I don't believe you actually have a concrete solution that will eliminate massive inequality and human misery.
Complaining about the status quo is extremely easy, and everyone does it. That doesn't mean they have a clue how to fix it. If you think you have a solution, prove it. Otherwise, I'll keep supporting the devil I know.
So, to summarize: you have no ideas for improvement, and just want to watch the world burn. Not put out the fire, not rebuild, just rage. Per your comments, Neoliberal policy has ruined the world and you hate all things Neoliberal, but don't express (or possibly have) familiarity with the alternatives you rail against.
Sounds good. Totally normal to be angry in today's environment. We disagree fundamentally. Not a lot more to be said.
The onus is definitely on the persons wanting change to make an actual case for that change. So yes, it is their responsibility to present a vision of their alternative future that I will accept.