This thread is permanently archived
Is democracy failing?
| Depends what country you are talking about
USA: uh it was never a democracy to begin with, its a democratic republic
Russia: never had democracy
Japan: is doing politically fine
Brazil: has been doing fine but its very devided now
Chine: just like russia but with a brief period of democracy before the ccp cane in
Canada:nothing happens in canada
Australia: full of dumb govenors that cant focus on important things
| most people don't want a true democracy. we don't have any true democracies in countries right now in the world, technically speaking. as long as people don't want a true democracy to be made, well, there probably won't be one.
| i think that most people would be alright with a dictatorship as long as the leadership is made up of brilliant and ethical people that just solved problems and fought for bettering people's lives
| >>721009 true, thats utopical as fuck but it is true, a perfect leader that could manage everybody would be the optimal option.
| Democracies don't exist in our current world, the word itself was just used as a political move to get popular support.
And a dictatorship is bullshit, because a not only would a dictator fall to evolve with society, since it's basically impossible as an individual, and also because as soon as he dies or gets manipulated or whatever, everything goes to shit. Also, him being perfect wouldn't mean he can control everything to make it perfect, thus it wouldn't work.
| >>721019
i disagree with you on many things but what i meant initially was an autocratic regime in >>721009
| i wish you could also understand where i'm coming from...
left wing socialists are identity politics bullshit that play on emotions and won't actually solve anything, the right wing capitalists basically ends up with the common person getting shafted by big companies that sell stupid stuff, ecologists are interesting but infected with left wing pedantry and suspiciously sound like hippies, communists are totally outdated and fearsome in their idiocy...
| and conservatives are just the continuation of the system of BS that we all know and are unhappy about for some reasons we kind of understand...
| and all the while this BS 'democracy' where the people are supposedly in power, keeps rolling round and round, where the leaders are slaves to the media, slaves to public perception, and barely capable of solving the bad issues in our society, such as pollution, corruption, the system of greed, cultural chaos, fucky education, wasted potentials, and so on and so forth......
| all your politics are succ
| >>6a7f89 that sure was fun read amd I tottaly get it, society is full of bs and circle jerking, they rather focus on the ideals and the utopic way of doing things rather than actually think and work on way to solve the problems.
They rules us thinking that we are limited, blinded by their own ego and ideal, while failing to see how thats their own limitation
| And the same applies even in a full on democracy, the mob of people who is lazy, ignorant and uncultured will also hold each other back and will care for issues that are not well thought out.
There must be a way to balance both the will of the people and an upper elite comprised of capable people, since the extreme of both ends will just hold humanity back
| According to Aristotle "Democracy" is only one of six political constitutions.
All these constitutions differ in two main categories:
1. quantitative
2. qualitative
1. describes the number of sovereigns:
- one person
- a certain group of people
- all people
2. describes the status of the constitution:
- "true", the souvereign(s) aim at a common good
- "perverted", the souvereign(s) aim at their own, particular good
| >>721056
this can be represented in the following scheme, by giving each combination a name:
sovereign(s):[common good|personal good]
one:[Monarchy|Tyrannis]
some:[Aristocracy|Oligarchy]
all:[Democracy|Ochlocracy]
As you can see, also "Democracy" can turn into a perverted constitution, called "Ochlocracy". It's when all people only care for their own personal interests while ignoring or even violating the common good.
| But the best thing about this model is, that those constitutions are transforming into each other circlewise:
The Monarchy degenerates and becomes a Tyrannis. The Tyrannis is overthrown by a group of people becoming Aristocracy. But also Aristocracy degenerates and becomes an Oligarchy. And the Oligarchy is overthrown by the masses, that found a democracy. But this democracy also degenerates becoming an Ochlocracy. The demand for a strong leader brings back Monarchy.
| And so the circle starts repeating.
But we shouldn't forget that lots of things happened since ancient times. Back then those things took generations. In modern Times they can occur within a couple of years or even less.
We also shouldn't forget that the romans dealt with this issues successfully over a very long time by having elements of all three quantitative kind of sovereignty at once:
- consul (Monarch/Tyrant)
- senate (Aristocrats/Oligarchs)
- plebs (Democracy/Ochlocracy)
| >>721058
That's a common misinterpretation. Socrates wasn't against democracy. He was against the degenerating form of democracy at his time.
| And yes, recently the western "democratic" world faces a period of degeneration of democracy, because people individually put their particular interests over the common interest. Separation and chaos is the result, causing a huge demand for a strong leader. But as already mentioned in this era such a leader may turn into a tyrant very quickly.
To avoid that we should (re)introduce a mixed constitution (like the romans) and fight ideologies/mechanisms that promote/reward egomany.
| >>721062 I know, thats even why I said that didnt like it THAT much, wich implies that he wasnt tottaly against it and since I was replying to a post where you explained the proces of degeneration there was also the implocation that he didnt like that process of degeneration of democracy
| Another big problem is, that eastern autocracies are currently unexpected successful which makes people in western/democratic countries shit their pants because they always believed they are superior because of "freedom". This kind of fear/insecurity in western countries is another major threat to democracy.
But don't panic: as our democracy degenerates, the autocratic regimes also do.
| >>721071 well they only develop themselves when the supreme leader decides so, non democratic governaments as good as lack of ego of their leaders so no wonder they can develop well when done right, knowing that it can work doesnt even hurt democracy it just shows how utopic and low the chances are of it actually working
| >>721075
Democracies worked very successful as long people didn't act like total asshole egomaniacs. Unfortunately misanthropic and anti-humanist ideologies are very popular these days. According to them people were and are always, everywhere and inherently bad and egoistic. And this works as a self-fulfilling prophecy in a stupid feedback loop.
But I'm sure we once will overcome this idiocy. We have to. And I want to live through it.
| >>721084 saying something wont make it true, if people are becomming "worse" then this just means that their theories have a basis, doesnt mean they are intierly cprrect tho
| was teddy wrong?
| >>721086
The majority of people always behaves as society expect them to behave and according to the societies reward mechanisms. If a society expects and rewards being a selfish asshole, then people become exactly this way. It's a matter of informational supremacy. And in our society economical-political oligarchs have this hegemony. Their hegemony was threatened by the internet, which is why they put all effort into domesticating it, independent form political alignment.
| >>721176
To be honest, I dont know.
At the current rate we may come closer to a point where we can't just "start" something anymore without having a radical end of what is now. But it's really hard to say when this point is reached (maybe it already is). Supporters of reason across all geographical and ideological borders are in an exhausting defensive battle against corruption, populism, separation and societies degeneration - always threatened by becoming what they fight against.
| The two main goals are institutional transparency and democracy which is significantly threatened by authoritarian governments on one hand and by private companies on the other. On a global level it seems we have a competition between orwellian 1984 and a huxleyan "brave new world" approach (of course with some mixed forms in between). They all are dystopical. This should be encountered by having an utopian alternative in mind, which comes with two major issues:
| 1. Having a well defined common ground on how this utopian society should look like - it's a matter of theory
2. Identify and agree on the best way to reach it - it's a matter of practice
Being serious about this means a lot of hard work over generations including frustrating backlashes. It's nothing that can be reached through a static political programme in a couple of years. The most important thing is, not to give up, stay open minded and affectionated to humanity as a whole.
| >>721198
No, it's the opposite by definition. You fell into the trap of orwellian "war is peace" newspeak anti-logic.
| >>721200
nope. most utopias i've heard people talk about would be a dystopia to other people. that was my point. also, your argument that i fell into the trap of newspeak is actually a logical fallacy, which allows you to ignore the problem.
| >>a351d6 ok your first mistake was wanting to stablish an utopia as a goal, utopias are not real and are just delusional.
Also, the bad about that ideas is that if ANY person does something that takes society further than that utopia then this person get brutally punished even if what they do is good, because it strays away from the ideal society so utopias suck
| The best way I can think to fix a society is make the whole process know to people, a well educated population will always be smarter than any individual.
Not only that but we need to patch these stupid loopholes in the law, this is how governaments are taken over by corrupt people.
We need to be more flexible and not be afraid to come up with ideas that are not just based of ideals.
Encourage people to solve problems and not to preach like a maniac.
| With these factors well executed, society will gradually advance, it wont be perfect, corruption will exist but people will be more focused in solving these preblems rather than taking sides and screaming at eachother.
If the people know stuff they know where, how and what they should fight, this isnt ideal its just giving people the tools and teaching them how to use it so they build society to fit what comes in the future
| utopias exist
| >>721206
>utopias are not real and are just delusional
But EVERY GOAL is not real. Goals per definition can only exist in mind until they are reached. Believing that utopian goals are inherently bad is exactly the way of thinking that makes human/societies development being stuck and even degenerating backwards.
| >>721202
Yeah, and most flying machines you heard about weren't working until people managed to make it work.
| Another issue in these days is that people are used to and expect instant satisfaction and convenience. But there still are things that take decades, even generations to make them work. Also there is a deep misunderstanding about the role technology plays and a way too big trust into political/economical authorities.
| >>721208
And how are you going to solve the issue of informational supremacy regarding eductation of people?
As I already said: Transparency and democratic mechanisms in political AND economical institutions should be our top priority.
| >>721208
I basically agree with some of your statements, but I don't agree on categorically refusing collaboration with people that are motivated by utopian goals and even generally blaming them for being "part of the problem" without any differenciation.
| >>721202
I see that there are problems with utopias, because as you said: there are many that already fail in theory. Most prominently those who promote the physical extinction or enslavement of a selected group of people.
| But I don't see why we shouldn't talk about it and agree on not to aim on those kind of false utopias.
| >>721206
Your example won't occur in reality, since utopia will never be reached. It's only a direction where to go. This is why we need to clarify what kind of utopia we are talking about, as already mentioned in >>721197
| >>721207
>We need to be more flexible and not be afraid to come up with ideas that are not just based of ideals.
Yeah, that's what we have been told about now over decades. "Be flexible" "be practical" "ideals are bad" "efficiency". Didn't work. I think the opposite case is true: We need ideals and get rid of this false "pragmatism" idiocy which is massively based on particular political-economical interests.
| >>721223 if people are more prone to questions, learn and search in their own accord then most people will want to know the truth, having this pressure will already be enough to make anyone question if they should post some fake news
| So instead dooming ideals we should discuss, use and develop some that are better than the convenient fast-food ideals that have become so popular once again.
| >>721222 that is the attitude that makes people fall for fake news, they only want the chewed up info instead of actually looking at multiple sources, comparing and analysing them, but people dont do that, curbbing that attitude will make so people naturally learn what is and isnt fakenews, they wont need porabably biased fact checking companies saying what is real
| >>721229
Sound pretty much like the currently dominant "everyone on his own" approach, and as we can see it is exactly what leads to a growing acceptance of conspiracy theories and fake news.
| >>721231
>they only want the chewed up info instead of actually looking at multiple sources, comparing and analysing them, but people dont do that
Yeah, because most people have to work 40 hours a week (or more) to have a minimum living standard (and in most parts of the world even to survive).
| >>721228 people havent actually become any more practical and efficient, they all still live by ideals and take sides even if that means they will take unethical decisions, look at america, brazil, whole europe, australia(tho it seems more chill there), all these coubries are ideologically and politically segregated cuz they care more about sides and ideals rather than truth and progress.
| Division of labour is, like technology and industrial production, a double-edged sword. It's efficient and gives us potentially a big amount of wealth. But it also makes people massively dependent on each other, on society and hierarchical organization.
| >>721232 yes people are on their own, but as I said they are lazy and want the chewed up information, they are on their own but are not educated enough to take the responsability of being on their own so we gotta teach and educate people duh, not just kill individuality and put everyone under one ideal that preach some sort of ideological marvel that will put us in a utopia that we dont even know how to reach and will make us haste and rush with no actual planning
| >>721234
Ah, I understand. You believe that in those countries the issue is about two equally bad sides and the truth is somewhere in between or lost somewhere else. But with this (highly debatable) portrayal of things you just created another side by introducing your "truth" that stands above all the others.
| >>721233 so what we do? Make then gain more for working less, curb our natural progress and put then on some ideology and swear to them that if they dont fall out of the program society will just fix itself into a utopia?
Nah, we theach them how it works and what works, then they will build themselves a society with the help of the governament
| >>721236
>as I said they are lazy and want the chewed up information
That's a very elitarist and misantropic look on people. As I already said, most people have to work 40h/week (minimum). They aren't lazy, they are just too much exploited.
Also I wouldn't say it's a bad thing to take side in general. Your "I'm at no side"/"I'm with truth"/"neutral"/"centrist" idea is nothing but a very elitist and somehow totalitarian side on its own.
| >>721237 thats is the most stupid way to debate, instead of distoring words why not just give an actual arguement?
And to answer you, uhh we cant lose what we never had, humans were always triablistic and took sides troughout history.
| >>721239 I never said I have no side or that I know truth, I just said people should know how search by themselves in an efficient manner isntead of just mindlessly consumming chewed up information, if people are prone to question and search they are prone to find truth, its basic probability
| >>721238
Well, by mentioning the working class you introduced a category which in my opinion is central to the current issues of our modern societies. So, do you believe that capital and labour share the fruits of their production fairly?
| >>721244
Yes, you are totally right, but at the same time you ignore that making people participate on decisions regarding society will cost resources. So we need to cut the general living standard (especially in first world countries) and/or think about a better/more fair distribution of ressources across countries and classes.
| >>721245 hell no, but not because of the system, more because people are corrupting the system into exploiting them, thats even why I said that both dictatorshit and full on demoidiocracy wouldnt work.
We need a balance, mediators and people who want to know the truth so everyone is somewhat on edge and wanting to solve things isntead of just preaching or blindly following ideas that are not that well thought out
| >>721246 the problem on that is that if we just cut peoples way of liv8ng they will either riot or just leave, how about we teach people first and then let people discover if they want or dont want societal reform, for all we know maybe society is already good and we are ruining it because we arent making a good job at something small.
We dont need to rush societal reform, let people decide if they want it
| >>721247
Well, then you have a very idealistic view on the system. I don't have. I believe corruption is inherently a part of this system as it is rewarded massively. The institutions that are meant to tame/moderate the system are weak or even have become part of it.
| Forcing societal reform and ideologies is just as bad, authoritarian and prone to corruption as any other process in society, its like the romans forcing christanism in all of europe
| >>721249 "the system is evil cuz it was built to reward the currpt"
Thats a very tribalist and ideological way of thinking, and it negates history itself, the system wasnt made to fullfill an elite it was made to create order, but it was corrupted by the ammount of loopholes, crimes, corrupt people getting in power and etc, no society is found under the principle of giving all power to someone, the hoarding is just what heppens when it is underdeveloped poorly manged
| With better management, better rules, less loopholes and the cooperation of an efficient governament and population it just works by itself. Knowledge and wisdom, if everybody naturally knows what to do they will know what to do, of cpurse there will still be conflicts since nothing is perfect but people will still reach better solutions over time and slowly fixing society to fit what they need, its like a societal reform but slower and less authoritarian
| >>721250
Here you compared apples with oranges. Plus I have no problems with most of christian ideals, except the sexual morale (which isn't special to christianity). Also the romans only (mis)used christianity as a tool for their imperialism.
| >>721251
I never ever said that the system was made by someone. It even doesen't matter. What matters is how it currently works.
| >>721251
>no society is found under the principle of giving all power to someone
No. Se the the third reich and stalins and maos pervetion of communism for example.
| >>721258 >>721259 ok what do you define as society? And what do you define as the system? Cuz seems like we are having a semantics problem
| >>721257 to understand what is now you have to understand its growth, the system now favors an elite but it wasnt made to be that way, it was corrupted and distorted into that way, if you can understand that then no system was created to favor one person or an elite.
Also my mistake, what I meant there was favor not just centralize power, there is a fine line between those, since yeah there are societies made to centralize power
| There just isnt a society made to just favor especifically a an elite or or a person at the cost of everybody else
| >>721256 not really, both ways force some sort of ideal and manners under the promisse of achieving something better, those are facts and there is no denying on that.
You THINK you are better cuz in your head forcing societal reform to the betterment of man kind in a utopic manner that doesnt acutally fit the needs of everybody and even may oppress some needs.
Just like the christians thought they were bringing salvation and reclaming the holly lands, by making god happy
| Utopias and societal reforms are extremist ways of thinking that force people to follow rules and have of a certain way of thinking just like religions, those who dont fit in are either banished or eliminated and those who pose a treath and just killed, unless you want to keep "terrorists", "nazis", and other bad groups alive so that they can question your society.
| If people cant question an utopia then they are just under a totallitariab regimen with a flowers and glitter over it, under the name of equality, fairness and righiousness we will stomp, "reeducate" or kill those who are a dissiminating fake news, killing people, and spreading bad ideologies.
Sounds very totalitarian right? Cuz it is
| Oh and no ill will to christians since like most ideologies, the intentions are not really bad its just the cruddy actions they take to enforce their morals onto others and how it doesnt give space for people to question something, ideologies and religions are very simillar in that aspect and both were used in simillar ways in history so the comparison is very much fair and reasonable
| >>721262
"Society" and "the system" are related to each other through a continuous progress based on conflicts between economical classes called "dialectics".
"The system" is the way how we produce and distribute goods. And it's the materialistic basis of all man-made immaterial phenomenons summarized as "society": religion, morale, culture, politics, etc.
This is still the most plausible and scientific view on history, without romantic fairy tales of heroes and supernatural forces
| >>721265
To be honest the promise for salvation by obeying to feudal rulers and reclaiming the holy lands (whatever "by making god happy" means) were the most stupid things that occurred in the name of Jesus Christ. The best things of christian ideals were and the idea of forgiveness, peace and also social revolutionary statements (e.g. the "parable of the camel and the eye of a needle")
| >>721263
Centralize power is economically efficient and on the long term unavoidable. But it's worth nothing without granting all people equally control over this kind of power - which will always go on cost of efficency/productivity. Elections of exchangeable political parties and politicians and relying on individual consumer choices isn't enough.
Decentralizing power also comes on cost of efficiency and it eventually won't solve problems but moving them around instead.
| >>721299
Well, it seems you distinguished between societies that favor and centralize power and additionally questioned if it matters to societies who is in control of the power and who benefits from it.
| >>721268
The difference between religion and ideologies is, that religion relies on believes in supernatural forces and dogmas. Ideologies can be free from this believes in supernatural stuff and don't need to rely on dogmas that contradict facts and science (even thought there are non-religious ideologies that contain similar thought errors, e.g. "social darwinism" or racist theories)
| >>721301 no, I actually wanted to say that there is a small but signifcant different between favoring a group and cetralizing power in a group, and how this differentiates that there are societies created to centralize power to a group but never to one especifically made to favor a group.
So sorry for not explaining it properly
| >>721302 its in the name, IDEAL, its not real therefore ideologies can and most likely will contradict or bend an aspect of reality to maki it fit the standards proposed by an ideal. And so many "cientists" have used "studies" just to push an ideology and they still do even to this day.
Its an ego and bias issue, if people cant question and find an answer then it is just oppression
| >>721303
>there are societies created to centralize power to a group
Yes, i agree...
>but never to one especifically made to favor a group.
I still don't get it. :-(
I mean, if there is a society that centralizes power to a group or person, isn't it very likely that this power has a corrupting effect on those people on the long term, turning into a society that favors this group?
| >>721304
>And so many "cientists" have used "studies" just to push an ideology and they still do even to this day.
Yeah or more likely to serve certain economical interests...
However
>if people cant question
This is what science is about. But again we have the issue of accessibility of economical means. People that work all day and spent all their income to effort a minimum living standard don't have the resources to graduate and question scientifically.
| There is with no doubt a fundamental interest conflict between economical classes, which plays a more prominent role for the issues of humanity than it is given room in the public debate, which is dominated by superficial identity politics.
| >>721307 just because you use a wrench to breack skulls doesnt mean it was made to breack skull, it was a tool for manipulating screws but some maniac decided to use to crack somebodys head and so it became known as weapon.
Silly anallogy but its the best way I can explain how there has never been a society made and found under the principle of favoring just a person or a group of people and how they were normal places distorted into it favoring someone
| And every suggestion to reforms, changes, and measurements which are rather about "fixing the system" than about overthrowing it are confronted with stupid allegations and convictions about being evil communist/socialist.
| >>721310 yep this is why I keep saying on other threads that the best way to end racism is to end poverty( very idealistic I know) now how to end poverty I dont know for sure, my theory is a good economy and a market that protects small business from major companies
| Look how things are framed at the US-Politics for example:
public health insurance = socialism
more strict weapon laws = communism
anti-racism = vandalism/terrorism
environmentalism = opression
Joe Biden = Stalin
Donald Trump = freedom fighter
liberal media = communist propaganda
george sorros and bill gates = somehow evil capitalist but also socialists?
This is what almost half of the population believes in.
| >>721312 because usually thos reforms are just "why dont we print money?", "why not take money from the rich", "why cant we just tax the poor and let the governament control theur bad habits", " how about we resets the global economy and create a whole crisis that will make people loose all their posetions and private property"
These plans all suck and have authoritarian, absolutists and utopic ways of thinking
| >>721313
Great. But media will say you want to punish big companies for being too successful. It's communism. You idea threatens freedom.
| Oh and lets not forget the classic "look at this new system I built that is just like NOT socialism with a bit less of facism"
Like those ideas are either too enforcive to aplly without a bloodbath, not good in the long run or just plain delusion of "if we just share eveything no one will die or be corrupted".
Society is too complex for all that
| >>721317 this is whay I said Protect instead of favor, because yeah it would not be fair to favor small companies, but protecting them from exploits in the law that create monopolies is very fair since no small company can have a monopoly
| >>721316
>"why not take money from the rich"
Honestly: Yeah, why not. Just have a look at the global distribution of wealth. Even if it is no ultimate solution, it would be a measurement which is overdue and didn't happen for over 70 years now. In the opposite. It went all bottom-up.
>"why cant we just tax the poor"
When was this ever a proposal?
>"and let the governament control theur bad habits"
It's not only the evil government which aims to control peoples habbits...
| Going back to >>721318
This is why I think giving people the tools to fix society as they see fit is better than forcing everybody to fit into a utopic mold.
As long as each generation is propperly educated the chances of them progressing is higher, with a good(not perfect) way of sharing and exchanging information
| >>721319
Small companies could join to become stronger. ;-) This is how most big companies emerged once.
Also how are you going to protect law from corruption by big companies? Wouldn't it need estate organs more powerful than this companies? How to control this power?
| >>721320 because taking money fron the rich would create a huge gap in the economy where suddenly a huge ammount of currency would just be shifted to another place wich creates inflation.
This was a proposal by some dumb politician who said poor people make poor decisions and the governament should c9ntrol their moeney trough tax.
| >>721322 this is where you are being naive, they dont join, they just sell eachother out and create a gang that favors eachothe but excludes other small busines that cant afford to enter. Business is cut troath man, this is why small companies suffer, medium ones also curb and exploit them when possible
| The best way to fix economical disparity is not by forcing money from one part to another, its hasty, naive and irresponsible.
Make more jobs, give more education and wait for people to naturally and organically fix eachother out while also mediating anything issues that come along the way.
Impatience is what kills societal reforms as a concept, they wanna raush change to the present instead of securing the future
| >>721323
Sounds like blackmailing by the rich to me. "If you tax us, we hide our money somewhere else".
The same country that tries to stop immigrants with a giantic wall, leads unjustified wars and murders people with drones in foreign countries and spies even on allied politicians isn't able to stop rich people to shift their money in to tax oases?
Ok, I never heard of that "taking tax from poor people" thing (how to take taxes from almost nothing?).
| >>721327 uuuh no thats not what is going on, lemme explain.
There is the global economy wich puts every country in debt with another country.
The is the national economy wich involve the costs to run a nation, now say that we have a country that has an unbalanced distribution, and most of the money belongs to an elite, this means that governament has tax the people to pay the national debt wich includes rich
| Most of the taxes in the USA come from the elite, now what happens if we take like half of the elite money and give it to the people?
The governament loses taxes, the people all of sudden recieve a lot of money,that they wont be able to manage and will be spent mostly in more silly consumerism, possibly being overspent and raising poverty and giving all that money back to the rich with even more since there are a bunch of monopolies in the US
| So now by taking money from the rich we crapped on the economy, increased national debt and poverty.
All because 1 we deviated moeny from one place to another creating an economical gap in the cycle and 2 cuz most people woudnt know what to do with the extra money and would just spend it on what favors the elite wich are big companies.
| So right now, under the current situation, robin hood manouver wont solve anything and in the worst case will make it worse
| Yeah, I see your point. But I wasn't thinking about giving all money from the rich to people directly. I was more thinking about investing in transparent, open and democratically controlled public institutions like schools, universities, anti-corruption and anti-trust jurisdiction, consumer's protection organizations, employees organizations, etc.
| And so I will repeat myself and say, hastyness is bad and we wont solve these problem efficiently trough radical societal reform since the people will learn nothing, the culprits of the corruption wont be discovered and punished and we will just create more holes in the system that will allow more corrupt people to exploit others
| Also common public social insurances, including health, pension, unemployed, disability and legal protection.
| >>721334 wich means giving the money to governament letting them manage an even bigger national budget that the clearly wont try to exploit from right?
| >>721335
I also understand your point here. On the other hand doing nothing (or even the opposite, putting oil into the fire) out of fear that there could be too much change for people is also stupid.
| >>721334 >>721337 we already have those institutions they dont need more money since, as you said, they are public, they already have money
| >>721338
As long the government is more transparent and democratically organized than the rich peoples private institutions, I think the money is invested much better there, yes.
| >>721339 have you heard what I said before? Teach the people, reform the loopholes of the law, deal with the corrupt elite and give it time! Eventually they will fix eachother, not need to ideologies, utopias or hasty economical plans, just plain old trust and healthy teachings to the people and the governament, its more risky but also more organic and natural
| >>721341 read this again>>721329
And to add onto that, have you seen how much influence companies have over the governament? How the governament has been failing to stop companies from creating monopolies and the state of the internet!? All the governemants around the world have been doing such a poor job at that, trusting the governament wont do they are too corrupt and/or too inept to solve the current issues wich is no suprice since they are all old and disconected
| >>721340
really? It seems to me the educational and social sector lacks of public money, and is massively dependent on private peoples contributions (which don't only come out of philanthropy)
Especially in the USA there is a ridicolous bad image of "the government" on the one side and a massively romanticized positive image of "the entrepreneur". I just don't get it. In Europe people are very fine with welfare estates until they started to dismantle them in name of neoliberalism.
| >>721345 look at countries with higher public services budged, trust me, there is a reason a lot od people in the use have been fighting about if they should or should now have free healthcare and more public institutions but thats a whole nother can of worms.
So yeah... if you looked into it you would see that public services have a price and a consequesces in the same way that not having them has, wih the way it is now I dont recomend the US to invest in it
| >>721343
Okay, so you believe rich people already pay enough or too much taxes and that it is threatening economy and somehow common good? At this point it would be great to undermine this statement with numbers, because I suspect your estimation/evaluation being wrong.
| >>721347
It's fun: The USA were internationally most successful by making HUGE inventions into public institutions (unfortunately often destructive ones like the military and secret services)
| For example the "new deal" facing the global economic crisis, space race during cold war and finally the educational reforms in order of the "sputnik shock" The whole US tech industry has it roots in this era of governments investions.
| >>721348 oh no, they can pay more taxes the problem is that, taking a huge ammount of money so fast will just inflate a part of the cycle while hollowing out another and will possibly destroy the economy in the long run.
You seem to be activelly avoiding what I said about slow reform and just trying to justify you ideals of fast reform by trying to debunk my reasons of not liking fast reform
| >>721353
The thing is, the longer there is no such kind of reform or even a contradictional policy (like in the last decades) the pressure to do this reforms is increasing. Doing nothing or making things worse by continuing going into the wrong direction will lead to a catastrophe as bad as a revolutionary change.
| >>721350 the concept of military was invented by ancient nations before christ was even born, secret services already existed in ancient japan trough ninjas that were contracted by some emperors and pirates that were contracted to pilage or attack other nations naval forces, america is not that original, all they did was give those services a big budged and actually try to make it work unlike other public institutions. They ar emore inept than you think trust me
| In the last decades the markets were "liberalized" (=deregulated), environmental and social standards were decreased and rich peoples taxes were decreased. Not only in the USA btw.
| Also public inventions were decreased. In most european countries for example there was a strict austerity policy - which did not solve any problems. It just carried them into the future or to other countries.
The military budgets, btw. have increased everywhere.
| >>721354 thats your problem, haste, in a timely and long well prepared reform thing will just be fixed overtime with better social plans, the natural will and decisions of the governernament and people, with a few minor conflicts, its steady progression that can be naturally mantained by the average person making better decisions and the governaments being more pressured into taking better actions, it wont be fast but it will help society in the long run
| In your head you think that people will just sit around for more years and all of sudden poof into utopia, but thats not how a long reform works, in those years people will be changing and discussing what to change and they will make changes, just not all at the same time cuz it would create an unhealthy radical shift that could make part of people snap and riot and create more authoritharian ways to keep the reform going
| Im noe proposing to not change, Im proposing to slowlly change and carefully evaluate each option and also educate the people so they can contribute to said changes cuz there isnt an individual or small elite that can perfectly manage a society, it needs the cooperations of both the people and the governament
| I never said that I prefer a radical shift over careful and well prepared long term reforms. I just said that at the current rate it doesn't look possible anymore. It's like the ancient absolutist regimes in france or russia or the soviet union, when it was too late for reforms and the systems collapsed/were overthrown.
At this point I'd like to point out that overthrowing "socialism" was quite peaceful/civiliced. Maybe socialism hadn't a too bad effect on peoples behavior ;-)
| >>721357 they decreased cuz guess what? Imagine paying the tuition, health care, living costs and managing national realations of millions of people! Public services become more expensive and harder to manage when you have at least 20 million people per country, so the governaments have to cut budgets if they wanna pay other things and with all the crisis, the colapse of the gobal economy and etc, they have to increase taxes or cut budgets
| >>721361 have you seem the ammount of deaths and conflicts we had over that? And saying that its too late for a non radical reform is just like those people who say its too late to stop global warming, well guess what if people slowly try to find better plans for society, invest more into research of other energy sources, we can over time fix things epecially because they are slowly fixing it
Here is another analogy for ya
| >>721362
But economy grew at the same time. Technological advance and more efficient organization increased individual productivity massively. The unemployment rates were pretty low most of the time. But it seems like only a few people could benefit from it. And it wasn't the people at the government, except those who supported those neoliberal policy.
| Say we hava a ship that is slowly sinking, and some people propose rhat we should take parts of the engine to patch the hull because the pices of the engine are easier to get, it is a bad idea in the long run since we loose the engine and get stuck
| So hastly using the seeminly faster and efficient idea created another problem that will create another crisis.
So why dont we take the mobilia, metals and furniture of the ship and teach people to how manipulate these materials to build a ship, then everyone knows hot fix the broken ship and how to use their own resources to make it work without breaking other important parts of the ship
| >>721363
So you suggest gambling with humanity and the environment, blind believing/speculating that technological advance will magically solve all problems in time?
| This methoed is slower but while some are teaching, others are already working on the fixing wich means by the time everybody is educated the will already have patched the hole, fixed the engines and we will now have a bunch of people capable of fixing that issue if it ever happens again as long as we also teach them the value of legacy and passing down information like the ancient humans did to ghrow into what we are now, simple but effective in the long run
| >>721365
The problem with your parable is that "the rich" aren't the engine of the ship. They only own the ship. And people on the ship need to take some of the non-engine parts of the ships from the rich to fix it.
| >>721367 not we wont just leave it to the people, will teach people and let them research the best solutions. Say, what is better?
An mass of idiot.
A super genious
A small group of capable people
Or a mass of capable and educated people
The answer should be obvious right?
| >>721369 yes they will end up taking from the rich but the difference is that they will learn what to do with what they took instead of either chucking it at the sea or consuming it for thenselves
| It wont be just a small group rilling up the passangers to mindlessly take parts of the ship to patach a hole and when everything seems normal they realise that they just oppened a bigger hole somewhere else
| >>721371
Yeah, I totally agree on that one.
But again I see a major problems in informational supremacy, economical efficiency and finally distribution of and access to economical means. How to solve this problems without taking money from the rich, as long they don't invest it accordingly voluntarily.
| The capitalist class puts many effort in restricting the nature of information in order to turn it into artificially bare goods/means that can be possessed and sold like material goods. At this rate we will reach a point people won't be able to "find their way" because it is restricted through copyright laws. "Intelectual property" is the keyword here.
| Most modern devices on the markets aren't properly documented how they work and what they do exactly. How should people ever be able to understand how things work in such an environment that forcefully exclude them from knowledge?
| I personally strongly support the idea of "public money, public code", but it feels like a fight against giants. Very stupid giants btw.
| I'm also very engaged in labour and consumer rights organizations (for over 10 years now) but things continue getting worse and worse.
| And the current political developments, especially the rise of the radical right, prevents me from believing that this system can be saved through reforms.
Maybe it is you, who is stuck in utopian/idealistic beliefs into this system and the dogmas behind it, that aren't working anymore. At least not for a continuously growing amount of people.
| arguing on and on and on... this shit itt is why it stagnates and rots...
| >>721374 >>721375 and this is why you are so stuck, you think that the the problems comes from right wing ideologies while its actually the cobflincts caused by both the right and the left, like a lot of people you are caring more about the lables and under wich set of morals the ideas come from insteado of actually caring about making a solution and learning to reach a solutions
| >>721376 just because you dont know doesnt mean everybody else doesnt, there are a lot of datamniers, hackers, and tutorials for that out there, not only that but look at how kids quickly learn to use those devices, of course they use it to do stupid things but thats because they are kids they lack the experience to know the true potentil of those things.
Learning new thinsg isnt hard if you really want to
| >>721383 well if you work there and things are still getting worse this means you insisting in a error, try again in a different ascpect, you cant repeat the same action and expect a different reaction
| >>721384 you seem to blame right wing politics a lot yet I see that you are very found of left wing politics, so explain to me why would I be the one under delusional ideals?
If you choose are taking sides and even if as I explained, in some of our discussions, and how the ideas your side takes are not well thought out yet you seem to still insist on them, how can I be the one beliving in a utopia?
| You used arguments that while interesting were not really that effective at explaining how a slow reform would be inneficient, you also failed to explain how taking from the rich NOW would be good, also didnt explain how an utopia could work, and you failed to explain why ideologies are good, yet you wanna tell me that I am the one beliving in the wrong solution, one that wont lead to anything in the long run! Dude thats just insiting in the error eich is something ideologies cause
| And tbh Im not against ideologies Im against putting some ideologies on a pedestal and also against claiming that certtain ideologies are the root of the evil. Because that black and white vision is a very ignorant way of seeing the world, humans are not inherently good nor evil, so these things arent just born out of either mal8ce or good intentions, society is way more complex and requires even more complex solutions that are not being protraied properly by ideologies.
| So ideologies should not be extinct, just not as relevant as they are now since it clouds peoples vision, ideologies are a suggestion and way of living, not a basis for building a whole society put of, thinking that way will only devide people since they will create inneficient societies that will think that they are superior for following a certain ideal, it will be like religious, tribal an economical wars all over again
| >>721392
The problem I have with the right IN GENERAL is the following: Their policy is all about maintaining the status quo, ignoring problems or even continuing a policy that factual IS A MAIN CAUSE for current issues. If there is a crisis their only offer to people is to look back into a romanticized, idealized past which never existed. And they offer dividing concepts like nationalism, religious fundamentalism and racism. Those things belong exclusively to rightwing ideologies.
| >>721479
Which doesn't mean that I've a uncritical om "the left" isn't an ideologically homogeneous mass. There are many different groups within the left with even contradicting concepts. Yeah, this also applies to the right, but there is a major difference between the left and the right: Their goals are entirely different. And thinking about right-winged society ideals there is almost nothing I agree on.
| Left groups have also similar goals, which (other than right-winged groups) I agree on. The problem I have with lots of left currents is, that I don't agree on their methods. Some are too impractical/idealistic and others are too opportunistic and contradictional to their original intentions. I'm no (left-)liberal cosmopolite, no radical anarchist, no socialist and yet not even a communist.
| I like the idea of social democracy, which seeks to solve the issues capitalism through reforms - and I honestly don't care if this leads to a socially tamed version of capitalism or to communism by overcoming it. What matters is that people have equal chances, live peacefully together, treating each other fair and beeing able to take their destiny in their own hands with no masters above and no slaves under them.
| But I continuously loose faith that this is possible. With every new crisis that occurs things get worse. More and more people rather question fundamental achievements of civilization instead the underlying capitalist order, which somehow seems to be immunized to any kind of criticism. As soon someone brings this kind of criticism into a discussion certain people silence them with nonsense killer arguments like "evil communist", "look at venezuela", blah blah blah.
| I mean look at the situation in the USA, where a fucking Joe Biden is seen as a puppet of socialist conspiracy by almost the half of population while the same people at the same time see a anti-establishment liberator in a Donald fucking Trump, who is the literal incarnation of the establishment in it's most retarded form: A fucking million dollar privatier by fathers grace with machismo/chauvinist views and dividing rhetorics that remind on nazism/fascism.
| I mean look at the situation in the USA, where a fucking Joe Biden is seen as a puppet of socialist conspiracy by almost the half of population while the same people at the same time see a anti-establishment liberator in a Donald fucking Trump, who is the literal incarnation of the establishment in it's most retarded form: A fucking million dollar privatier by fathers grace with machismo/chauvinist views and dividing rhetorics that remind on nazism/fascism.
| Very simmiar kind of assholes are also in power in a growing number of other countries, namely Brazil, Turkey, Hungary, Poland, Russia, Belarus, and many more. Their success is the result of a massive political failures from the centre-right to centre-left, which all have one thing in common: Corruption through big private global players, liberalization of markets, increase of peoples mass surveillance, economical motivated and highly destructive military interventionism.
| >>721501
And with success I only mean their success in elections and slowly gaining informational supremacy, not actual success in solving peoples real issues.
| >>721480 >>721482 >>721490 ok this I get.
>>721495 be careful there dude, some people just dont have the patience toe xplain why they are against something so they go to simple short arguements, and well most people also cant back up their ideas and then when they criticize something their ideas are crap so its wrong on both sides
| >>721498 if you look at his actions trump is not so stablishment as he seems to be but yeah calling him anti stavlishment isnt the right call, biden doesnt seem to be socialist spy, he is more like a dying old dude trying to become a politician and for some reason the midia loves him and refuses to cover any of the problems him and his family has and they also like correct his gaffes for him, just plain old favoritism from the midia
| >>721501 >>721502 calling it a center left/right conspiracy isnt the good call, if you look at what os going on the political spectrum is being more used as a cover up to real issue, cuz it divides people and doesnt let them see the real problems.
This is just what happens when you have giant super monopolies that have influence over politics, its not a left right issue its more about the elites asserting their dominance with their big companies
| >>721550
I was never calling the rise of the far-right a center left/right conspiracy. When I wrote about their "massive failures", I meant it literally. When the USSR started struggling and collapsing conservative and liberal and even social democratic politics missed the opportunity to make something new which combines the best of both worlds. Instead they unleashed the capitalist beast by breaking the chains that hold it.
| >>721550
And the issues you mentioned are real. Global playing companies bypass laws that were made by democratically elected politicians, and sometimes they even introduce laws themselves through lobbyism. And yes, this phenomenon on its own is neither a specific left or right thing. But both sides have different interpretations and come up with different ideas to do something against it.
| >>721550
Let's take take the european financial and currency crisis for example. The right says, the crisis was caused because of the weak character of greek people. Because corruption and lazyness are specific to greek culture the right said. And that's why they need to be disciplined by force with austerity politics. This would never happen to germans, because they all are honest and hard working people. It's all a matter of culture or even genetics the right says.
| While I wouldn't deny that cultural factors also always play a role, I think it is often massively exaggerated. Greece and Germany have a slightly different development history which is more based on topological, topographical and technological factors than about peoples mentality/quality.
The real big problems are much more universal than the political right believes/says. They always blame certain groups based on superficial and sometimes even completely made up characteristics.
| And yes, parts of the left also started focusing too obsessive on this kind of characteristics, which I find wrong. Nevertheless to me they have a much more understandable motivation/intention behind it. "Identity politics" is the umbrella term for this phenomenon.
The right only uses it to justify and keep the status quo by making lame excuses for issues and crises by dividing people and blaming more or less arbitrarily selected parts of them.
| The left is about crushing privileges and achieve equality and fairness between people. And I'm talking here about equal rights and equal chances in diversity, not about equal income and uniformity as the right often complains.
The problem about the left is, that they lost their focus for the underlying structural economical issues like the generation and allocation of resources and some potentially flawed paradigms behind it (e.g. "eternal growth")
| >>721565 the companies nowadays control what is left and right via the information control they have, remember, the momment trump started talking about removing troops from asia, there was a massive boom in pro war people who called themselves left wing(ironic I know), companies can already make pro war action seem left wing and libertarian
| >>721566 >>721570 >>721573 you cant justify identity politics if you cant justify nazism dude, that hipocritical and fucked up
| >>721575 the nazis were removing privileges from the jews for equality and fairness cus the jews, for cultural reasons, had more resurces during the post WWI crisis in germany.
Well that was their justification, so when the left attributes privilege to religion or race well... look at the rabbit hole they are digging themselves into.
Nazism 2.0 black & white equality (fuck asians) edition.
| The best way to realocate resources, in capitalism, is trough removing the corrupt from the system and then let the process heal itself by jobs, a stable economy and better education.
Doing a hard reset or deviating money to another part will just inflate a part of the cycle and destroy another, and since the cprrupt have a control over the cycle they will just get the money back.
| >>721595
>he nazis were removing privileges from the jews for equality and fairness
murdering million of people = removing privileges? Nice relativization of holocaust. In some countries you would get in jail for such an statement. For a good reason I find.
| >>721592
Not everyone who claims to be "left-winged" is "left-winged" or follows a left winged policy. Especially not, but not exclusively, if they are labeled by political opponents this way. Take nazism, stalinism, and very often liberalism or social democracy for example. The "national socialists" weren't socialists as "the democratic republic of korea" isn't a democracy. And many liberals and social democrats followed an agenda of neoliberalism and transatlantic interventionism
| in the last decades the Centre-right (conservatives, partially liberals and libertarians) successfully maintained a huge propaganda campaign that made many people believe that the crisis of capitalism is caused by some kind of socialist conspiracy. And because this never was true and they didn't manage to solve the issues, there is now a far-right that thankfully took over this propaganda lie mixing it up with their nationalist, racist and religious fundamentalist rhetoric.
| >>721596
yeah, the problem is that everyone who wanted to "remove the corrupt" was either corrupt himself (trump) or if being too serious soon blamed as evil communist, who is all about destroying liberty and drinking blood from little children.
| >>721595
Also, your totally flawed comparision between left and naziist (=right) identity politics is that only a tiny minority of jews was privileged and they shared those privileges with a way bigger non-jewish elite.
| Your argumentation is also pretty ignorant to the fact that the progress that was made in the USA wasn't made that long ago and is only of juridical nature, not of economical. The big shots mostly still are all old white conservative men from the old industries and their wealth will remain in their still mostly white families. Yeah investment ind education would be great. But "free" markets mechanisms fail here and public education investion is blamed as invaluable and communism.
| >>721804 the the thing is, nobody knew the jews were being murdered, all that was shown at the time was that they going to "work camps".
So the in the time they didnt knew what the holocaust was.
| >>721808 how can you say that and even assume righ wing=nazi in the first place? Thats not only hipocrate but shows how you generalize one group yet keeps favoring the other, you are biased
| >>721809 yeah blame far right for an economical crisis just like the center right blamed communists for that crisis, you are jusy shifting the blame back but not even analysing the real issue that caused the crisis, it had nothing to do with left right bs
| >>721810 but none of those "evil communists" had good plans, thats the problem, they wanted to put policies and use tatics that were rushed, innefctive or would cause more damages in the long run.
I would rather things stay the same than apply a plan that will make things worse, if you wanna fix something you gotta have the skill to back it up.
| >>721811 well guess what identity politics is just as flawed, not only the ammount of white poor people matches out with the balck people but everybody forgets asians and even how most of the succsesfull(not super succesfulin general, just above average) people are asians, the say white people ar eprivilged but asians are the ones with the most resources and as a black man Im not miserable.
| >>721812 its not ignorant, just not detailed, all I did was say what to do, but how we could educate the general population and remove the corrupt people? I dont know, because I never managed a country, and there is lots of small things thats need to change for things to start going, but Im not gonna do like some people and claim that we need to RUSH a freaking revolution that could make or break peoples lives, that takes responsability and planning, its not just take and give
| >>721820
That's racist Bullshit. A huge majority of asian people is poor as fuck. The inequality is even worse compared to white people, who are much more wealthy in average.
| >>721818
That's your ideologically flawed view on history. It's a undeniable fact that the USSR had social, scientific and economic successes that were a challenge for the non communist countries. They won in the end, but the sudden absence of this kind of competitor had a very bad effect on the later development. The scientifically proved, existing issues of the capitalist system are ignored and debates about crises shifted to right-winged bullshit esoterics.
| >>721822
I've just read the SIPRI report which said that global military budgets have increased by 8% this year. But yeah. We don't need to rush. Just wait for the next 8% next year. And another 8% for the year after that. And then the next big crisis comes, selfish deluded asshole mob lead by selfish deluded asshole leaders will kill each other. And unfortunately also everyone else who knew it better but was ignored because "uh, leftists stink".
| At the current rate history is going to repat itself, but now with intercontinental missiles, drones, nuclear bombs and eventually even autonomous murder robots. Because military is cool and civil public education is just for evil communists.
| Capitalism is so great. It gives peoples jobs in sweatshops. Stupid asian people, why they work in sweatshops? Probably because it belongs to their culture and race? Because asian people are like ants and determined to work for their white masters, like black people. This is how many right-winged white people excuse issues of humanity. But they'll wonder. At some point they will be fucked to either by the system itself or by people who were sick being on the loosers side.
| Do you know the saying:
"rather a terrible ending than never ending terror"?
| >>721824 identity politics is stupid because it goes from the principle that different races have different values in society and the only way to fix the innequality is by compensation and forced diversity, it assumes its impossible for someone to be succesful just because of their race, when this is clearly a lie, its is just as racist as any of these "right wing" bullshit out there
| >>721828 >>721830 >>721832 >>721833
What the heck are you even talking? You sound like paranoic conspiracy theorist, military budgedts incresed because the inflation increased.
If history repeats itself then guess what there will be another cold war and there will be more of the advancements you said there were in when ussr was a thing so isnt that what you want? Competition means that there will be conflict duh
| >>721834
>identity politics is stupid
I wouldn't generalize it this way.
>it goes from the principle that different races have different values in society
This is racism and/or cultural relativism, which is prominently right-winged identity politics
>the only way to fix the innequality is by compensation and forced diversity
This inequality exist but it's based on known historical devolopments. And diversity isn't forced, it is supressed by right-wingers fetishizing homogeneity.
| >>721838
I'm no conspiracy theorist. I just spit facts and you play it down. I have to admit if the SIPRI did include global inflation rate in their calculation or not, but I'm pretty sure it is not higher than 8 percent. So there is a growth of worlds military budgets. And it isn't just because some people are corrupt or because the capitalist system is secretly sabotaged by socialist conpiracy. It's because capitalists hope war between people will save their asses again.
| >>721838
>If history repeats itself then guess what there will be another cold war and there will be more of the advancements you said there were in when ussr was a thing so isnt that what you want? Competition means that there will be conflict duh
Yeah, this is theory. In practice it means that million of people will die and we eventually destroy the globe and humanity regarding the overkill potential we gained since WW2.
| Your argumentation sounds all like "there is no problem", "everything will be solved by itself". That's contains exactly the nearly religious neoliberal "laisez faire" opium which dominated politics for almost half a century now - and it failed. Massively.
| >>721844 that is not my arguement! My arguement is lets remove the bad people from power and give the tools for society to recover itself, no revolutions or radical shifts, just take away the poison and let it scarr by itself
| Most people don't live in such a luxury like you are used to by luckily been born as a white middle or upperclass male in a first world country. They are on a daily struggle of existence. Your strange faith in a mysterious invisible hand, spawning out of individual egoistic decisisions and somehow allocates ressources effective and fair doesn't help them.
| >>721846
And who decides who the "bad people" are? You? Me? Other people who are in power? How do you make sure that people don't get corrupted by power (that's what happened a lot in history)?
| >>721839 thats is just propaganda, we live in a era where if you say anything bad people will destroy you, actual racism has decreased so much, people of all races and genders, sexualities have been doing way better, all identity politics does for society is look at the advancements and scream how they are not enought while not presenting new solutions and using statistics to segregate us
There is a problmem but they arent helping, they make it worse by radicalising it
| And how are you going to remove the bad people from power? Do you ask them to? What do you do if they refuse?
| >>721848 its not hard to find corruption if the world is as bad as it is, there are a bunch of assholes out there too, and we have things like police and detectives and etc, all they have to do is do their job properly
| >>721841 wars are only prejudice and waste of money dude, unless you are already rich and can sustain your self, war is never profitable unless you have the power to win
| >>721849
I already said I don't stand entirely behind all kind of left (or pseudo-left) identity politics. The problem I see is the ignorance to economic reality. And yes, I also agree, that some rhetorics and methods are too extreme or even contradictional to the goal. What annoys me the most that there is one identity that was pushed in the background, which to me is the master identity to rule them all: Economical class membership.
| because, yes it also sucks being a white hetero-normative cis-man if you are poor like shit because the circumstances you grew up just sucked.
| >>721842 the lack of faith you have on society is astaunding, also a new wordl war wont destroy the planet we arent that dumb, and after the war people will recover anyways, life finda a way, and if a new war is comming then what can we do about it? I dont want it but I cant stop it so I will do my best to survive, you on other hand is trying to saying that the world will end if we dont revolutionize and take radicla actions that will actually contribute for a war
| >>721856
Yeah, dig your hole and hide waiting for assholes destroying everything, just to have new assholes above you who are going to repeat this procedure over and over again. I prefer being more active, fighting for a world with no other assholes over or under me.
| Also, I haven't that much a fetish for revolution and would always prefer reforms over it. The thing is, that this isn't always and everywhere possible. Especially if there are fundamental changes necessary, which is the case since there are fundamental issues with how the things currently are.
| I have great faith that humanity has the potential to make it. But I'm also aware of the massive destructivity and inhumanity humans are capable of.
| >>721861 so tldr you dont have faith in humanity you just pretend you do to feel safe, but the moment it feels like there is a chance to go wrong you back down and start pushing for ideas that will just enslave us to more stupid crap in the name of preventing war and spreading equality even if the chances of it being as bad as you think being lower and more make society seem more like a bad action movie where everyone is stupid
| >>721860 dude all you are saying here is, "I dont want revolution, but a revolution is the only solution" when this is not true, there are better solutions, there can still be reforms, the world wont end, calm down
| >>721859 see, thats paranoia, we wont go mad max, especially because if there was a new ww they wouldnt destroy the planet, it would be dumb to destroy the planet and kill everyone.
| Your main justification has been that you dont want a revolution, you dont like ideologies around as much as I do BUT that the world will end if we dont shove ideologies and start revolutions, thats a very limited way of thinking, we are still not at that point, get it togheter and dont panic, if people relax and think instead of wanting to take immideate action, we can fix this without any revolution or other forceful means. We HAVE a problem but we NEED to calm down and think
| So Im not undermining anny issue, Im just not paniking and thinking about it, because I know that if we just act without thinking ot think too fast we might just contribute to the issue by accident
This thread is permanently archived
| Recently i read an article that true democracy is failing. It talked about that not everyone wants to reform the government as long as they themselves can live to what they think is a normal life they don’t care what people are at power. I noticed this in Belgium where they still don’t have a gouvernement cuse the two biggest parties cannot work together yet it has to be a gouvernement of both those big parties.