Olgratin_Magmatoe @ Olgratin_Magmatoe @slrpnk.net

Posts

0

Comments

393

Joined

7 mo. ago

That's where they fucked up the implementation. It's being ignored because 1 party controls all 3 branches of the federal government.

They implemented a voting system that naturally devolves into a two parry system. Checks and balances don't work when you are the one checking yourself.

Agreed

Culture itself is a system maintained by force, in its particular case it's social force, peer pressure, pressure from family, etc.

It breeds opposition within itself, which is why it constantly changes.

And I think you're wrong in that cultural longer. A good example of this is the values of the boomers. They valued the nuclear family, working hard to get promoted, the police, the american dream, etc. It's now the complete opposite, the nuclear family is regarded as a joke, people loathe the idea of staying at a job longer than a few years let alone the decades the boomers would do. The police are hated, and the american dream is dead.

Only by ensuring that there are numerous power bases with the ability to effectively restrain one-another, and relatively free entry/advancement in each, can a free equilibrium be maintained in a society.

Agreed. Any system is going to require a strong system of checks and balances. That's one of the few good ideas the founding fathers had. They gloriously fucked up the implementation obviously. But the core concept is critical.

Of course, we have quite a few regulations and regulatory bodies nowadays, so the only real question is in the details of it, rather than the general concept. The concept is obviously workable.

For now we do.

Culture isn't static. It drifts over time and newer generations of people will cease to value what their parents did. Any system maintained by culture will die rather quickly.

Then i think we're largely in agreement. People should always be free to form small groups to follow their passion.

Though there is another concern. Co-ops that get larger than (guessing here) around 100 or so employees will start to act in the selfish greedy ways of current corporations. Even an employee owned co-op will eventually try to do everything in their power to make a buck. They're directly incentivized to do so.

So aside from the outright regulation from the social democracy, I've been toying with the idea of a requirement for a publicly appointed employee(s) that have power over major decisions. They'd probably need to be appointed via sortion, recallable by the public, and their wages independent of wellbeing of the co-op.

Another concern is the prioritization of common goods, and the actual mechanisms for welfare and social safeguards. Some number of co-ops would need to exist as contractors of the state, providing critical needs paid for by the state.

How do you equitably manage and distribute the cost of critical systems like water sanitation for hundreds of millions of people without a hierarchy?

I'd hope that size is like 10 max.

That, and it doesn't sound great to put in a squirt gun, which is almost certainly going to leak to some degree

Got another one for your list:

• bombing, shooting, and committing arson against abortion clinics and doctors

If your state concept is broad enough to entail any organization of a certain size, be my gast in a council republic

It's somewhere along the lines of "any organization that handles the administrative work and protection for a given territory".

And I don't think that's all that broad of a definition, and it includes your world wide net of councils as a state.

Importantly, you didn't answer the second question:

What would prevent centralization of power?

That's state welfare/insurance, not socialism.

Shit that's all you had to say

Unfortunately I quite prefer my mind being the only one I can hear.

How is that different from a state, aside from the decentralization of power?

What would prevent centralization of power?

I code using a telegraph machine in morse code.

Redjard already explained this, the situation for Hungary is similar.

Yeah kinda hard to do so when a world power decides to end your country.

If only there was some massive ball of super heated plasma in the sky from which we could draw energy from, that also moved the atmosphere of the planet which would open another avenue of energy capture, which also happened to move vast quantities of heavy things like water uphill which would also be an opportunity for energy, or if the ground beneath us was warm enough to use for energy, or if there were shiny green rocks the ground that could be used for power.

Yup, surely there have been zero alternatives.

How would society handle critical functions such as water sanitation for millions of people without a state to enforce equitable share of the cost?