This thread is permanently archived
Evaluate your political views and intrigue us
| I would give it a 7/10 as a centrist who likes to see every aspec and opinion i really do get to points that are eithe too complex for people to understand or too complex to actually execute in a society thus making me realise that humanity is fucked but at the same time knowing that there is still a solution and thus hope its just that its too convoluted
| This board got fucking BURNED
| i am a catholic council communist. i believe that communism is the inevitable movement towards a stateless, classless, moneyless society, and the way to achieve that is thru the founding of workers' councils and a "dictatorship of the proletariat" that is essentially just a federation of councils that comprise the majority of the workers. the councils will organize the workers, and function as a revolutionary organ, building dual power and crushing the bourgeoisie.
| >>693357
the councils will be as synonymous with the proletariat as a whole, theyll be as close to direct democracy as possible while still being able to keep a good line of discipline during the revolution, and then after the revolution they will essentially become communal self-governance. dialectical materialism also isnt incompatible with christianity imo. peoples thoughts are determined by their material conditions, and thats the official biblical heuristic of the church
| >>693359
the bible is all divine revelation, but the way the authors interpreted the divine revelation was only thru the lens of what their material conditions allowed. sorry for triple post but the charlimit isnt nice for pseuds like me...
| I'm a communist, because I see no future worth living in with capitalism. I'm also rationalist, skepticist and historical materials, which means I don't believe in history made by supernatural powers or superior individuals but by humans and their technology instead.
| >>693368
I see no future worth living with capitalism either but that doesn't make me a communist.
| Communist it the epitome of stagnancy and staleness
With no money and competion how do expect people to have ambition and ample resources when everyone has to share and produce for everyone? And with no ample resources and the concep of a leader you cant even mange such big projects to evolve and develop new things also history shows that people are lazy and wont invent something unless they need it so most people will be anti science
| And fuck dues to lack of conflict our own world is partialy anti science, look at flat earthers and anti vaxx people, they are swarming the internet cuz they lost faith in science and want to be special
I think the world would be much better and more advanced if we had more science centric world, heck it would even stall corruption since most people would be encouraged to be more rational and thing in long therm solutions
| I'm rating politics a light to decent 7/10
| communism has a nice end goal(for most people) but:
a) the means are fcked
b) i personally dont like a peaceful, equal world
i prefer pure capitalism(which hasnt been implemented yet due to the difficulty in doing so) because it is a battlefield, a war, and everyone is fighting each other almost constantly. that's kind of fun, y'know?
| >>693472
not a nice end goal for me... i don't believe in equality.
just look up Sir Oswald Mosley, sums up most of my politics.
| >>693571
how is it villanous at all?? have you never felt that excitement when you compete with others?
| >>693507
i looked him up but considering his political beliefs changed so much I'm not sure what you mean?
| >>693571 no conflict means no need for progress, we need competition to encpurage people to be better
We dont want people to be fighting and dieing we just want people to be able to have better conditions if they are willing to work so this way people will be rewarded for thinking big and wanting to create and evelo better ways for our society so yeah we want inequality but not on a degreee that harms people
| gurls can we vibe with the idea that not everyone needs to be forced into your political ideas?
| I'd like to say communist, but haven't read enough theory to make a good case for it. What I can say is that I believe market socialism is a good thing to aim for. That is, worker owned means of production, and workplace democracy. There will still be a free market, but as a worker at a company, you get partial ownership of said company, and you get to elect your boss. If this is ever achieved maybe some sort of anarchist society would be a cool end goal.
| >>693649 that requires that everyone cares and is aware that their actions have consequences and that they cant just act for their own benefit, but people are not like that, thats the major flaw of communism and even socialism here will always be the one rotten apple that will infect the whole tree and try to sap all the nutrients for itself and then it will crumble
| Communist is not an utopia because its phisically impossible or unsustainable, its because ir requires that everyone is complacent, a hard worker and a long therm thinker that cares about other, and most people dont have all 3 of those qualities at the same time
| So "I meant communism is an utopia not because..."
| I am anprim
Reject modernity
Return to monke
| >>693663 Could you be more specific? Worker coops, which is a small scale implementation of market socialism, have been shown to fare quite well in comparison to standard firms. Here's a meta study that supports that:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285356456_The_performance_of_worker_cooperatives
I don't think that market socialism will be the solution to all of our problems, but I think it might be a good start
| >>693820 all systems can work in small scale, because theres is more control and even more close relationships, small communities can live the way they want.
But its not a good start cuz making everyone to live that way will only scalete the the prolems and then all the things I said before will come to destroy it, communism only works in a small scale, and socialist works but its too much restraininfull for people on large scale
| And the funny thing is that capitalism doesnt work on small scale cuz the economy would be too inflated and the work load would be too high to actually put accesible prices
Anarchis in small scale is manageble but in large scales its just a mad max scenario with people forming bubbles of other economic systems thus evolving into a tribal system
| And if you still dont get it(wich is ok) lets look into this perspective: can you expect 4 people to live togheter and share everything? Yes they easily can
What about 50? They can but they would need to work way more and there would be some hurdles
100 peps? Its hard and convoluted, they would need to have at least 1 leader figure cuz not everyone is willing to cooperate
Then 7 billion people? Impossible unless you chain everyone and enslave them, too much work and no freedom
| >>693825 bruh when did I ever say that everyone has to share everything? The market socialism system that I propose would be very much like what we have now, but all large businesses would need to operate as worker coops. I guess you could say that workers within each firm share the firm, but as the study I linked has demonstrated worker coops do pretty well for themself. In fact, they would probably do better in a system which doesn't favour the capitalist model.
| >>693827
ok but how do you favor the person that works harder over the lazy bastard? i don't want them to have equal company footing.
| >>693827 As a worker you would not earn less money, you'd earn slightly more. If I produce a videogame under capitalism, a share of that videogames value goes to the people on top who own the company, even though that profit was produced by my Labor. In a worker coop, you get the full value of your own Labor.
Also, there is no way for me or you to know how well anarchism would work, since it has barely ever been implemented. This is why I think market socialism is a good start
| >>693827 because workers of an especific company are a small comunitty, but you cant expect that to be a good start for something bigger
| >>693832 the same way it's currently done, they get a lower salary. Exactly how salary is divided among the workers would have to be decided within the company, like how it's done today. The only difference is that the person who decides how much you earn is democratically elected by you and your fellow workers
| >>693833 anarchism is literally the stione age no rules just people by themselves, wich would lead to people naturally segrataing themselves in small groups and forming tribes, do you even history? your utopia wont last if you plan to make it big
| >>693835 i mean thats cool and all but like democracy doesnt impeed corruption and inequality it only hinders it a bit you should know that if you live on a country that has voting
| >>693834 Are you saying that the worker coop structure would not be feasible in a giant like Apple or amazon? There is not really any data that either supports or denies your claim, but if it's true, it could mean that a socialist society would have more smaller companies, instead of one or two giants, which would increase competition and promote innovation.
| >>693837 Yes totally! Which is why market socialism wouldn't solve all of our problems. But democracy is still better than not democracy right?
| >>693838 ok I've been thinking more about it and I realised that could only work on a large scale it its a manufactoring company cuz they dont have a real need to stuff like director or a ceo, but what about comanies that develop brands and products? They cant just not have someone that produces and manages ideas, it would be a mess if all workesrs had equal say in what ideas they would implement on a product escially when most of them wouldnt even know how a market works
| If they did vote for majority in such a big decision as to what they would produce they would go bankrup since most people dont know how make a product that would sell and the vote of the majority would basically lead to them choosing the most mediocre(not necessearly bad) decision since they dont really know how to predict the market
So only manufacture companies can actually work and profit from that system
| And I quantity does not mean quality cuz i would much prefer 2 to 7 big companies fighting and giving reasonablly good products than like 300 small companoes with bad to mediocre products trying to constantly one up each other making a super chaotic marked and saturising intire products and markets
| >>693841 of course there would still be ceo, CTO and whatever other high ranking positions exist in a company. The only difference is that that ceo has been elected by the workers.
Much like how electoral democracy works today, the average person does not need to be able to run a country, just vote for someone they think is qualified. And the average worker just needs to vote for whoever they think should be their ceo.
| well how about you become a big business owner? then you can implement such things yourself
| >>693849 "no conflict means no need for progress, we need competition to encpurage people to be better">>693613 your words!
For real tho, I don't see why worker coops would not work on a larger scale. Mondragon Corp. Is a federation of worker coops with over 70 000 employees in 257 companies and organisations.(Wikipedia)
| >>693856 that's the thing. Modern capitalism favours privately owned means of production, which is why today most people are still employed by capitalist companies. Worker coops would have to be enforced for larger companies. This sounds scary to the average libertarian, and it is scary for business owners. But most people aren't business owners, most people are employed at a large business, so most people would benefit from such laws. Which is why I think it's a good idea.
| >>693858 yes my words and they apply to that, but remember this that I also said that i wanted inequality in quantity that doesnt harm people?
You dont see why it couldnt work because you dont have enough experience on that field
| >>693854 do you know how ceos get to their positions? They either are the ones who made the company thus proving that that they are good for the job or *gasp* they are elected to enter that position
| >>693860 then educate me, why would it not work? By what specific mechanism does market socialism inhibit giant corporations from functioning efficiently?
| >maduro itt
| >>693861 they are elected by a handfull of board members. I'm proposing that all employees who have been at the company for more than a specific period of time take part in an election when a new ceo is selected.
| >>693862 read all that
>>693862 >>693841 >>693845 >>693849 >>693837
Or even better study economy, have some history lessons, also try to analyse human behaviour and psicology, talk to people, learn how to make a company, talk to someone that works on that field and think about how things affect people in the long run
| >>693864 lol
>>693865 and as I said before mosy employees dont know how to manage a company so how do expect them to know what should a good ceo do? Not that their voice doesnt matter especially because if they complain enough they can make the ceo quit so they do have an input on the company decisions, if the higher ups get abusive its an employees job to put them on the line
| >>693868 "most people don't know how to manage a government so how do you expect them to know what a good president should do"
>>693841 >>693845 >>693849 all ride on your assumption that worker coops don't have CEO's or other chief positions, which is false.
>>693837 is just stating that market socialism would not be perfect, which is something that I have written myself like 3 times now.
You have not yet provided a single argument as to why my model wouldn't Work for large firms
| >>693876 as I said it could work but only in the manufactuing process because if everyone had an equal say in decinding products and brands even tho they dont have skill to do so they would crumble the company, also have you forgotten about the whole explanation of why it wouldnt work in lage scale?>>693663 >>693664 >>693821 >>693822 >>693825 >>693832 >>693834 read every thing please it talks about commu ist but also applies to your model
| If at least 40% were born as proper leader with rational thinking, a caring heart, the abillity to take lomg therm decisions and are also willing to work hard for themselves and others, the world would be a much better place and they would probably not need leaders since evrone knows best but we live in a world where common sense isnt common so your ideas are very preety and pack a lot of good intentions but they are too idealistic to work and dont take human error in consideration
| >>693879 Dude, all of these are either points that I have already responded to, or just you stating that market socialism would not work. The closest thing you have to a good argument is>>693663, where you just say that one bad apple can ruin the system, but you never explain why my system is so easily ruined. Please be more specific instead of just referring back to previous points that I have already disproven. It's as much an argument as "capitalism bad because it doesn't work"
| >>693889 if everyone has an equal say than the the bad people, the lazy people, the corrupt people, the greedy people and the people who are actually good at job start to become the majority as you increase the amount of people in a place since the more people the more disconection there is since they have to keep more information more names and make more rules, this is why leaders were created people need people with power to command them because they are too laze or not qualifie
| >>693889 if everyone has an equal say than the the bad people, the lazy people, the corrupt people, the greedy people and the people who are actually good at job start to become the majority as you increase the amount of people in a place since the more people the more disconection there is since they have to keep more information more names and make more rules, this is why leaders were created people need people with power to command them because they are too lazy or not qualifi
| And the thing is most people are mediocre and do not have a lot of the above average( cuz ya know, its ABOVE average) skills to manage and know how to interact with their fellow employees and get a business going
Its all about human error, capitalist isnt perfet but at least reasonably punishes bad people by putting them in the lower possition most of the time because lile all systems it is exploitable, having such big companies with everyone having that much power
| Only leads to chaos and poor decisions, that much power shouldnt be centralized but at the same time shouldnt be this spreaded
And thats the problem, epople are not perfect and there will allways be someone that wants more than they deserve so they put themselves above other, on the other hand if ypu give everyone the same power and them you will have to take away the natural things that make them qualified or better at soemthi g
| >>693891 again, you could make the same exact argument against electoral democracy. I do not know how many times I need to repeat this
Worker. Coops. Still. Have. Leaders.
| All men are not created equal and ignoring that and trying to make everyome equal will lead to mediocracy and lack of differences, this is why inequity as a concep is needed but like all things there shoudl be a balance between equality and inequality, so how about we togheter come up with a new model that takes into account tha human erro? Seriouly, wanna do it? We can even make another thread
| >>693892 >>693891
Should we have a small counsell decide the government every 4 years because regular People can't be trusted to know how to run the country?
| >>693905 whats the point of a leader if everyone has the same amounto of power, if everyone is super then no one is, a title with no power is just a silly name
| >>693908 a country is anothe thing, and its way more complex than a company, and the thing is democracy isnt really that good to begin with so we also need a better way to decide our leaders, we should create a new one too
| And the thing is, everyone wants changes but the ones who are willing to create something new are rare and the one that can actually create something that is new that works is even more rare
| >>693910 yes countries are way more complex than a company, so if people are trusted to chose a leader for a country, they should definitely be trusted to chose a ceo. And even if you think democracy is flawed, which I guess it is, wouldn't you agree that it's at least better than having 5 board members decide everything
| >>693913 as I said on the same comment wanna try to do something better instead of deciding between 2 flawed ideas?
| If I had to define myself in a specific label then I'd be a national syndicalist bc I'm very much against both capitalism and communism, I'm interested in workers rights and I'm nationalistic.
| >>694033
cont.
>>693357
While I agree that capitalism is something that must be fought I think that communism as you stated it won't happen anytime soon. For me, socialism or syndicalism is the end goal and not a transitionary state. Also, I see that you're also a catholic; Did your belief in God influence your political stance as well?
| Why so many people are blinded by such stupid ideals? Utopias dont work darn it, we need to pick capitalism and expand uppon it, not regress to an ideal that only works if we chain ourselves down, humans can only evolve moving foward, not looking at an old book of the past writen by an old russian that had too much free time think about the future and how we can change what we have for the better
| And take human failiure into considerarion, people wont behave like you want to and if you force them to do so they will rebeland eventually they will fight back
| hugs me or i will declare WWIII! :c
| >>693649
worker co-ops are not socialist and market socialism is not socialist. socialism requires the abolition of the commodity form
>>694034
leftcoms/councilcoms like me dont believe in a true transitory state like marxist-leninists do. the ideal dictatorship of the proletariat wouldnt even be a state by friedrich engels' definition, since it wouldnt place itself above the population, instead itd be a real organization of the proletariat
| >>694034
also yeah being a christian definitely affects my political views. im a christian first above all else and nothing that God stands for is anticommunist. Jesus says "woe to the rich" and stuff like that constantly in the bible, and cheating workers out of a fair wage is a mortal sin. and as basic economics tells you, all wage-labor requires workers to be cheated out of a fair wage due to surplus value extraction, meaning that being bourgeois is a mortal sin.
| >>87ad36 if I understood these work coops thing correctly, you suggest that we take the same capitalistic company structure and improve it on the lowest hierarchical level. You know, even though I am pro-capitalism, I can totally vibe with it. The way I see it, everything stays the same, yet lower-level workers have more control over their working conditions. Please correct me if I'm wrong
| Sometimes I prefer to come out with the opinion that goes against most, like throwing a firecracker down a manhole.
Otherwise my opinion is more of a... philosophical, rather than political?
I don't care about people. I think enough are rotten to the core, no one cares or pays attention to one another and only care about virtue signalling and pandering to have things their way, much to the dismay of other people.
| >>694189 i agree tho I feel like these people are like a loud minority that basically managed to get in power and are now trying to do a revolution
| Normal people just dont care and want to have a normal life so they just ignore the issues until it actually affects them thus a sillent majority
There are the people who hate on the crazy sjws and become the exact oposite of them and being just as obnoxious wich is another loud minority
And finally the people who are seeing trough all that bullshit and want to stop these crazy ideolog lunatics but they are a powerless minority
| >>694189
I always vote the opposite. If Trump was just in power I would've voted for someone else.
Fuck everyone who's better than me(I'm an incel neet btw)
This thread is permanently archived
| The "What is your political alignment?"-thread was very popular. A lot of you have strong political views which is awesome so I humbly ask you to evaluate on your stances in this thread.
That other thread was very popular, so I assume this thread would be as least as popular. Becauase all of you have thought out, conscious, researched, scrutinized, measured political wievs, am I right?