Maybe don't call it "Communism"

I haven't read it but should.

If you are interested find the Gulag Archipalago by Solzhenitsyn. He lived and documented the depravity of the Soviets.
 
Are there any political systems in which everyone is actually treated equally? In outcome, not in doctrine, creed or manifesto, but in practice.

Might be wrong, but I don’t recall any. From one side of the political extreme to the other. There always seem to be the select few who occupy the upper echelons in any system and live well above the station of the majority. About the only difference I see in any of these systems is the percentage of those who occupy the majority.

Also; Politically speaking I lean libertarian. And I’m not a fan of removing any land, resource or possession from anyone forcefully. I also realize, ironically, that I have the liberty to express that because the political system I was born into does not share my beliefs. As I said, politically speaking. Religiously speaking I believe it’s wrong, amoral, no different than theft.
As to the first part here, no system has ever gotten it right. I would like to think that running things by committees, with power being highly decentralized would be a step towards curbing the tendencies of the assholes from taking advantage of the weak minded and weak willed, as well as those born without the full use of their bodies.

It would be very slow to act. But life need sto slow the fuck down.
 
putting 'equality in outcome' in practice would have to be intimately connected to the material conditions of the society in question and what that society has decided 'equality in outcome' means. is it opportunity, the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness? is it fundamental rights to housing, food, medicine? what would it look like in 500 bc athens?19th century france? 1st century rome? 21st century america? each of those societies has very different material conditions, culture and historical position that would inform their answer to those questions. what does equality of outcome look like for an able bodied person vs someone who is mentally disabled? for the scion of a rich family vs a poor family? a political system has to exist in reality to answer those questions, and they have to have some ideal to put into practice to do so, whether it be republicanism, libertarian minarchy, marxism-leninism, christian anarchism, or any other ideology

Im more comfortable with “equality of opportunity“ over any forced outcome, and “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness“ over much anything else, but those too differ wildly in implementation and outcome vs intention.

Which is my point, a large percentage of people are not “good people“, and any political system, past or present, which relies on or is composed of people, is doomed to fail for the majority of people therein. History teaches that, unequivocally in my opinion. I don’t care what you call the system, in the end the strong or privileged will take advantage of or exploit those “beneath” them. It’s human nature, and until that’s no longer in our nature, any such person proclaiming Utopia “if only” is a liar and snake oil salesmen, and any such system is bound for failure, sooner or later.
 
Im more comfortable with “equality of opportunity“ over any forced outcome, and “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness“ over much anything else, but those too differ wildly in implementation and outcome vs intention.

Equality of opportunity is the crux of the discussion. There are many peoples who've had their opportunity suppressed systematically for generations. There's many issues of multigenerational injustices to resolve, and we can't go backwards, only forward, so some model must serve to guide that forward motion. That's all I use any doctrine for: a style guide. But one where fairness REGARDLESS OF PAST CIRCUMSTANCES is held as a major guide post seems ideal to me as a way to rectify incurable injustices.
 
i have a more optimistic view of humanity. we're social animals, we work together, we go crazy when we're isolated from other humans. the fact that we've been congregating in settlements for hundreds of thousands of years to my mind puts in question the idea that we are inherently incapable of self governing or inevitably try to take advantage of others in destructive ways.

i also think we today have a very strong tendency to project qualities we see today back in time as though they're atavistic principles passed down we can't escape instead of drives which have been magnified and rewarded by the nature of the modern era. we live in a world built on the back of exploitation, exploitation which thrives on division and promotes it
 
i have a more optimistic view of humanity. we're social animals, we work together, we go crazy when we're isolated from other humans. the fact that we've been congregating in settlements for hundreds of thousands of years to my mind puts in question the idea that we are inherently incapable of self governing or inevitably try to take advantage of others in destructive ways.

i also think we today have a very strong tendency to project qualities we see today back in time as though they're atavistic principles passed down we can't escape instead of drives which have been magnified and rewarded by the nature of the modern era. we live in a world built on the back of exploitation, exploitation which thrives on division and promotes it
Yea, I think the bad actors are a small minority, but their actions have an outsized effect on others. This is what we see repeatedly throughout history. It doesn't take that much to start things down a shitty path, but seldom does everyone fall into this pattern, and that carries us through to the next iteration. We are clearly getting better at this whole thing with each pass, and I'm as optimistic as ever that we'll get there if we can survive ourselves.
 
As to the first part here, no system has ever gotten it right. I would like to think that running things by committees, with power being highly decentralized would be a step towards curbing the tendencies of the assholes from taking advantage of the weak minded and weak willed, as well as those born without the full use of their bodies.

It would be very slow to act. But life need sto slow the fuck down.

So a type of republic? That’d be a good start in my opinion, but unfortunately, I‘d wager those in such committees would eventually find a way to game the system for their advantage. However setting term limits would probably be hedge or deterrent against that.

Nothings perfect, but there are definitely better ways of doing things than any of our current systems.

As far as taking care of those less fortunate, that should be a vital and inseparable part of any equitable or egalitarian system.

Not to sound like I’m preaching to you, but those are also Christian fundamentals. “visit and look after the fatherless and the widows in their distress“, “be careful to entertain strangers“ “Learn to do what is right! Promote justice! Give the oppressed reason to celebrate!”, “The one who is gracious to the poor lends to the Lord, and the Lord will repay him for his good deed”, “...the resident foreigners, the orphans, and the widows of your villages may come and eat their fill so that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work you do“, and dozens more. Again, not to sound like I’m preaching, just illustrating that there is a great gulf between what many Christians say they believe versus what they actually do. Don‘t want you to feel like were all that way.
 
So a type of republic? That’d be a good start in my opinion, but unfortunately, I‘d wager those in such committees would eventually find a way to game the system for their advantage. However setting term limits would probably be hedge or deterrent against that.

Nothings perfect, but there are definitely better ways of doing things than any of our current systems.

As far as taking care of those less fortunate, that should be a vital and inseparable part of any equitable or egalitarian system.

Not to sound like I’m preaching to you, but those are also Christian fundamentals. “visit and look after the fatherless and the widows in their distress“, “be careful to entertain strangers“ “Learn to do what is right! Promote justice! Give the oppressed reason to celebrate!”, “The one who is gracious to the poor lends to the Lord, and the Lord will repay him for his good deed”, “...the resident foreigners, the orphans, and the widows of your villages may come and eat their fill so that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work you do“, and dozens more. Again, not to sound like I’m preaching, just illustrating that there is a great gulf between what many Christians say they believe versus what they actually do. Don‘t want you to feel like were all that way.
I'm the last to paint any two people with the same brush. I know that Jesus talked good talk, and I'd wager he meant it the way I think we'd agree he did, regardless of how some people seem to interpret his word as it was reported. I'd like to think that a system that developed slowly and carefully enough could have some more effective checks and balances built in.
 
So a type of republic? That’d be a good start in my opinion, but unfortunately, I‘d wager those in such committees would eventually find a way to game the system for their advantage. However setting term limits would probably be hedge or deterrent against that.

Nothings perfect, but there are definitely better ways of doing things than any of our current systems.

As far as taking care of those less fortunate, that should be a vital and inseparable part of any equitable or egalitarian system.

Not to sound like I’m preaching to you, but those are also Christian fundamentals. “visit and look after the fatherless and the widows in their distress“, “be careful to entertain strangers“ “Learn to do what is right! Promote justice! Give the oppressed reason to celebrate!”, “The one who is gracious to the poor lends to the Lord, and the Lord will repay him for his good deed”, “...the resident foreigners, the orphans, and the widows of your villages may come and eat their fill so that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work you do“, and dozens more. Again, not to sound like I’m preaching, just illustrating that there is a great gulf between what many Christians say they believe versus what they actually do. Don‘t want you to feel like were all that way.
I'm curious how you feel about the concept of taxation. It seems we can acknowledge as a given that any system of government will require funding to execute even the most minimal of functions, right? And what about mandatory voting? Wouldn't that help us to know better what people actually want their government to do?
 
I'm curious how you feel about the concept of taxation. It seems we can acknowledge as a given that any system of government will require funding to execute even the most minimal of functions, right? And what about mandatory voting? Wouldn't that help us to know better what people actually want their government to do?
I have always liked the idea of voting with my tax dollars. We are all intelligent adults, so why can I not put the monies I’m taxed into whatever social or collective interest I personally would like to see funded?
 
I have always liked the idea of voting with my tax dollars. We are all intelligent adults, so why can I not put the monies I’m taxed into whatever social or collective interest I personally would like to see funded?
I have considered sending only the portion of my taxes that funds those things, and telling them they can have the rest when they stop squandering it on the other bullshit. But I know where that would probably end, so, you know.
 
I'm curious how you feel about the concept of taxation. It seems we can acknowledge as a given that any system of government will require funding to execute even the most minimal of functions, right? And what about mandatory voting? Wouldn't that help us to know better what people actually want their government to do?

It’s think it’s a necessary evil. I hate that the vast majority is misappropriated, stolen or wasted, but what can you do at this point. I don’t feel like it’s theft, as long as there is an agreement that it will be used to readily and verifiably better the community or country you live in, and can and will be audited to ensure it won’t end up misappropriated or missing, but we all know that thinking is naïveté.

Funny you should mention mandatory voting. I was adding a post about mandatory service after my last post, but became so frustrated with my iPad keypad I trashed the post. I wasn’t talking about voting, but it could be rolled into the compulsory service I was talking about. Call it Compulsory Service. I was thinking of political positions. Looking around at all current candidates leaves one with an hollow feeling. I would hazard a guess that either many of you here, or at the least, people many of you here know in your personal lives, are brighter than most all current political options and would do a better job running things than the current crop of candidates. So why don’t we have compulsory service. 1) Term limits to hedge against gaming the system and ensure new people of all stripes are injected into the political discourse and decision making positions. 2) (your suggestion) Make it compulsory to vote. I would say that the only way I’d support this option is requiring it alongside actual education. I hate to say this, I honestly do, but have you talked or worked with many people under 20 lately? I have been astounded at their lack of knowledge about seemingly rudimentary topics. I don’t want to sound like a boomer or the old man yelling at clouds, but hiring knowledgeable, smart people shortly out of high school has become altogether depressing. 3) Compulsory civil service. Make it like some other countries do their military. You don’t have to serve your whole life, just 4 years. It could be military, political, or basic civil service. Like the groups which already exist where you can go to other countries and fix infrastructure, dig wells for clean water, provide medical aid, or even education. Except instead of doing it abroad, it’s done in your home country. IDK if it would fix many of our political and social problems, but it would certainly help.

I’ll also say this, to be perfectly honest, there would have to be a myriad of options available to people before I’d ever vote in favor of a system like that. Why? Because as I’ve said, I’m against forcing anyone to do something against their will. I’d have to feel like we’re not backing folks into a corner, and I’m not sure that’s possible in any such system. It is interesting to talk about though, and I do feel that it has the possibility to fix much of what ails our country, but I’m not sure the juice is worth the squeeze.

Prob gonna bow out at this point, until I get my iPad keyboard fixed anyway. Typing that jumbled mess above was a pain on my phone.
 
I have considered sending only the portion of my taxes that funds those things, and telling them they can have the rest when they stop squandering it on the other bullshit. But I know where that would probably end, so, you know.

Oh you’d definitely be getting a knock, at the very least. Probably also get some new bracelets.

If enough people decided to all do it at the same time though?
 
Compulsory civil service. Make it like some other countries do their military. You don’t have to serve your whole life, just 4 years. It could be military, political, or basic civil service. Like the groups which already exist where you can go to other countries and fix infrastructure, dig wells for clean water, provide medical aid, or even education. Except instead of doing it abroad, it’s done in your home country. IDK if it would fix many of our political and social problems, but it would certainly help.
Totally agreed. Lived in Italy a while where this system’s in place and never heard folks complain about it. They probably have siestas after wine and bomb meals included though…
 
I have always liked the idea of voting with my tax dollars. We are all intelligent adults, so why can I not put the monies I’m taxed into whatever social or collective interest I personally would like to see funded?
Enough people wouldn't fund basics in favor of their personal interests.

Look at animal adoption centers. People put tons of money and resources into kittens and drive past people in tents on the street.
 
Compulsory voting doesn't mean smart voting will happen.
I completely agree, but having the majority of eligible voters abstaining means that most people's preferences are not even considered, or worse, you get this paranoia that nobody's vote is being counted; that it's somehow rigged. I think we could start with increasing transparency and accountability. If a law gets passed that you voted against, at least we know that a real majority wanted it that way, and not just the people who got motivated to go vote. To even say "smart voting" is redundant. There are vast swathes of people who don't engage in smart living of almost any kind. There's people born into good enough circumstances that they can keep failing upwards. Their voices count too, for better or worse, as well as people of various other circumstances where the opportunity to find any avenues to education where not available. No decision needs to be forever, and laws can be changed again if we don't get it right the first time.
 
Last edited:

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom