xhotaru

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Everyone just says this, but they never say why. If you agree with me on the fragility of centralized systems how exactly would a decentralized socialist area be any weaker to the rest of the capitalist world than a centralized socialist area? Why wouldn't it be the other way around?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I can get behind that a lot more, but keep in mind, you're always going to have to end up trusting someone. And I assume the sensible way to go around such a system would be to be informed by it and not commanded by it. To take its data into account when making a decision but not simply doing what it recommends immediately without question. It's after all still a machine

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I get what you mean - the planners and producers become the same economic class, as in their relation to property and capital, but you're acting as if political class does not exist, the planner has way more power than the producer - as the planner literally controls the production and decides its fate. The planner belongs to a structure of governance the worker doesn't, the planner is hierarchically above the worker, the two belong in different systems that incentivize them to do different things. You can elect the planners, but it doesn't fundamentally solve that problem, as you then just rely on rolling a dice over and over and over hoping a good planner is put in that position, and with the passage of time that wont happen

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

In what way are they part of the planning structure exactly though?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (6 children)

What would ensure the central planning mechanism always puts the needs of the people as the goal, and not the needs of the central planning structure, or the needs to perpetuate and protect it?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (8 children)

can you elaborate?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (10 children)

oh yeah I didn't say it was any different in capitalism, it's the same thing. I'm trying to tell you it's mostly the same thing. it's the position of massive control over the economy paired with a goal thats the problem to me, not the ideology of the people in that position, that can lead to variations but the problems with the approach are the same either way

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

The thing is, it doesn't matter. like... i totally agree that politicians are paid by the capitalists and most are just goons, but even if they weren't goons, they'd behave in the same way. maybe the favours would be less, maybe they would be to different people, they'd do x or y thing differently, but the core abuse of power and trampling are always going to happen, perpetuating your rule and reach and protecting your power and position will always matter more than any reform or serving

of course I'd much rather have strong democratic checks than nothing but I still don't think it'd be enough to justify it

I know I'm kind of a doomer on this but I just have never seen or read about a ruling structure that didn't behave this way

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I don't want this power in ANYONE's hands, no matter who they claim to serve

States and governments only serve themselves anyway

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

YOU NEVER DID

COME ON EXPLAIN IT

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

definitely true

view more: ‹ prev next ›