kenax
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
quite a long article, read a bit, but one quote rang a nice tune:A fully democratic society is only possible where there is social equality about the means of life. Great differences in social privilege or economic power inevitably corrupt the practice of democracy. I assume you've heard of the Zeitgeist movement? Read an interesting article how cities should be structured, based on a community of people, growing food, living together in harmony. I think with the way technology is going that there will be some sort of revolution within the next 5-10 years. 3d printers releasing us from the tyranny of the factories, bitcoins as our own currency, our own free internet, free electricity, permaculture technology for food in exchange for minimal work. I think we live in very interesting times, i only hope the revolution will not be bloody, but obviously the present elite will not give up without a fight, which is why their mainstream propaganda arm is constantly trying to push us towards WW3.
i find this all very interesting discussion and thank you for the feedback. just some thoughts: what do you think of anarchism? sort of socialism? with my direct democracy idea i purposefully made it so that it can be broken down into regions. why do there have to be countries anyway? why should politicians in some city thousands of miles away be able to dictate micro regulations in some little village? so handing more control on a local level seems somewhat in line with anarchist intentions. then a second point, which seems the folly of democracy. people vote how things should be on a general level, so the rich might vote for less taxes while the poor for more. everyone is basically voting for their own personal interests and benefit, so it becomes like a tug of war. in the end though, if every single person in some particular country voted to make marijuana illegal, in the end it is my own body, a plant, and my own business. so i do not believe other people's vote has any jurisidiction regarding what i can do with my own body. i just intend to create a means where people can propose ideas and vote on them. it seems to me a farse in this day and age of the internet to hand over all the decision making to people every four years, when often times they dont even fulfil their campaign promises and serve their funders instead. i hope that any discussions such as these sparks some thought toward action. most peole just seem asleep and let themselves be dazzled by blue or red balloons every four years. it just seems ridiculous to me.
additionally, let's just assume that these two systems cannot be combined and you swing the pendulum to the extreme, perhaps like the Soviet experiment. where there was still an elite, rich class, like the politicians, sports, those could by Tatra, the Russian equivalent of limozines, while the rest had to wait years for a crappy Lada. there would be a line-up two blocks long every time the state was ready to distribute another round of toilet paper. westerners visiting the country would be shocked to find out they had to pay $2 for each square of toilet paper from their hotel. meanwhile, every four years the population had the opportunity to elect from communist party A, or B, perhaps C. whatever form of socialism, why cannot the people submit their own ideas and vote on them also? under communism people were not even allowed to leave, because most would, considering that free enterprise leads to more efficient means of production and the people in the west were better off because of it.
well, isn't a state owned railway basically socialism? any state owned company, like single payer healthcare? there is now a movement in the US to fight against capitlist forces who are against net neutrality, which is very dangerous, whereby the municipalities are forming their own internet and making it free for everyone. this should be a public utility, like water, or building roads. or if you have a family operated restaurant, is that not basically the workers owning the means of production? so of course the two can be combined. capitalism just needs to be properly hemmed in. from my understanding certain european countries in the north have a good combination. education might be free. in certain provinces in canada healthcare is free. why would that not be considered a form of socialism? and if electricity is considered a public utility but the state charges something for it in order to discourage waste, is not charging something for it considered a form of capitalism?
personally i think that capitalism has brought a lot of innovation and progress, because without profit or incentive most people wont bother to develop something new. the problem is, especially in the States, is that it has gotten out of control, allowed to conglomerate into ever more monopolistic power to the point of not being far from outright fascism. this includes the mainstream media. i'm for a combination of capitalism and socialism, that may have existed to some degree before Reagan and his susequent era and fairytales of trickledown theories. and if average joe could submit an idea and the rest of us vote on it, this could lead to greater innovation of thought and ideas, as opposed to handing full control to representatives who would make all the decisions over a four period and our only power of choice is the elections once every four years. i think that anyone being able to submit ideas and the rest vote on each idea individually supports and is a form of socialism.
