this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2024
22 points (89.3% liked)

Comics

5983 readers
9 users here now

This is a community for everything comics related! A place for all comics fans.

Rules:

1- Do not violate lemmy.ml site-wide rules

2- Be civil.

3- If you are going to post NSFW content that doesn't violate the lemmy.ml site-wide rules, please mark it as NSFW and add a content warning (CW). This includes content that shows the killing of people and or animals, gore, content that talks about suicide or shows suicide, content that talks about sexual assault, etc. Please use your best judgement. We want to keep this space safe for all our comic lovers.

4- No Zionism or Hasbara apologia of any kind. We stand with Palestine 🇵🇸 . Zionists will be banned on sight.

5- The moderation team reserves the right to remove any post or comments that it deems a necessary for the well-being and safety of the members of this community, and same goes with temporarily or permanently banning any user.

Guidelines:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (88 children)

If only there were some kind of way for it to not devolve into totalitarian dictatorship...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Rather than placing absolute power of The State in one person's hands, start with an elected council of members whose number is not divisible by 2. Transition to a Stateless co-op arrangement. Congratulations you just implemented Communism the way it is intended to be implemented, and no dictator could screw it up.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

It's really simple - centralization = seat of power

The worst flavor of people are drawn to that like moths to a flame. It's not even a good idea, any potential economies of scale are wasted by communication lag in the bureaucracy

Decentralization is key. You can have a commune easy enough, humans self organize just fine in small enough communities. There's communes all over the world doing just fine

The question is, how do you knit those small communities together in a way that doesn't give anyone much power, but still come together when needed?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Australia had communism for 60,000 years and never developed a dictatorship.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Would you like to provide a link, or any sort of proof to back up this outlandish claim?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Calling it communism may be a bit of a reach, but collectivist social organizing in a variety of ways was and still is a very common element of indigenous cultures around the world.

This link focuses on family and child rearing, but it's a good window into how Australian aboriginals express collectivist principles.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

lucky u, there is; its called just doing the fucking thing like normal, cuz non of the historical examples did that so u know.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Communism inevitably will always lead to dictatorship and totalitarianism.

In order to become a communist state, you have to: 1.) Get a bit army or group of people to enforce the upcoming rules. 2.) Force people to get rid of private ownership or threaten them to give it up. This will piss a lot of people off. 3.) Get rid of them if they don't. This will piss a lot of people off. 4.) Realize that you've pissed a lot of people off, and that your the only power in the land, you definitely don't want to give this up. 5.) Enact a single party system.....oh, fuck....

Communism doesn't work on a large-scale, and it's not sustainable. By it's very nature it's extremely prone to abuse, and fundamentally impossible to install any sort of checks and balances on a single party-system. Look how bad it is with a two-party system in the US.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

fundamentally impossible to install any sort of checks and balances on a single party-system. Look how bad it is with a two-party system in the US.

Buddy, checks and balances are one of the many reasons why our democracy doesn’t work. I already covered this elsewhere in this very post.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

The failure of democratic checks and balances does not preclude the failure of communist checks and balances as well.

Democratic Socialism is where I’d like the US to head. But we have to start consistently winning majorities so that we can fix the disproportionate representation that’s hurting progress and making electing the progressives needed for change difficult.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (84 replies)