Downvoting also decreases visibility of the statement, effectively silencing the speaker. If I disagree with a statement, why should I be able to prevent you from even considering it? How is this reasonable discourse?

I'm confused. Does the US (and other countries) not have a system of capital & private ownership of the means of production or what? We're literally commenting on a site run by venture capitalists.

So capitalism doesn't exist ANYWHERE in the world is your claim...

Even regardless if that is true or not, why downvote criticisms of it regardless? Isn't downvoting used here to encourage novel and thoughtful insights about any particular subject we find interesting, not to pass judgement on whether we like the criticisms or not? If you want to downvote someone for personally attacking someone, go for it.

If you want to downvote someone because they have an insight or question concerning the potential deficiency of a model or system, why not respond and articulate the counter point instead of just downvoting?