It’s not as much the system but the attitudes and ideology that need to change pretty much entirely.
The problem is authoritarianism, whatever path you take there. Maybe there’s a government type that minimizes the odds of a rise of an authoritarian leader, but I don’t know what it would be. If somebody knows, please tell me.
The problem is Bolshevism. With workers controlling the means of production and strong gun rights, communism could have worked. Instead, party members became the new bourgeois.
Communism sounds great but it assumes that the people who rise to the top and run the government are going to share the wealth. Humans aren’t like that, we are too selfish. The ones who reach the top will always take more and give less to the ones at the bottom
There are many systems that reduce the risk, but none so far that eliminate it.
All systems are made up of people, and all rules are only relevant insofar as people are willing to follow and enforce them…
Wow, feels great to see someone who sees this. Thank you
Mandatory note: Fuck the elites of red fascist nations, this is just pointing out the immense hypocrisy of conservatives. When it’s painted red, it’s bad - when it’s painted gold, it’s apparently Just Good Business.
… also, secondary mandatory note, the elites of many Soviet-style nations lived worse lives than Western proletariat, other than the potential for managerial-style exploitation of subordinates (both practically and sexually), and achieved that standard of living only by import of massive amounts of Western consumer goods. Kings of the Ashes…
Yeah, while I’m not a fan of central planning or command economies, if you’re going to criticize something at least understand it first.
💪💪💪 Decentralized planning
I prefer “emergent self-organization”.
