Community >> View Post
·
Post By
Late Great Donald Blake 
Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,461
In Reply To
The Mandarin

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,017
Subj: It depends on what you mean.
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2022 at 11:04:47 pm EST (Viewed 254 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Yes basically that's it, and we should be realistic.
Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2022 at 09:07:16 pm EST (Viewed 264 times)

Previous Post


In capitalism, the first winners of the
capitalist race work to shut the door to the top behind them,
favoring their families and golfing buddies, creating monopolies and
oligopolies gradually funneling all the money and soft power to
themselves, and allowing them to bribe politicians to acquire
indirect hard power. They then become feudal lords in all but name.



In communism, those bureaucrats in
charge of distributing the wealth favor their families and golfing
buddies. They then require ever more amounts of policing power to
enforce this disparity, resulting in a constant seesaw where the
goods given to the people get ever smaller, requiring ever more
policing power to prevent a rebellion from resulting, resulting in
even less money getting distributed to the people, requiring even
more money be given to the policing needed to prevent rebellion,
until the country is just a feudal system in which the Feudal Lords
are called bureaucrats.


Ultimately the core problem isn't
capitalism or communism, but tribalism. That is to say, the natural
tendency of human beings to favor their families and friends over the
good of the nation. Fighting against this tendency requires a massive
amount of both careful systemic design, and vigilance.



In communism, those bureaucrats in
charge of distributing the wealth favor their families and golfing
buddies. They then require ever more amounts of policing power to
enforce this disparity, resulting in a constant seesaw where the
goods given to the people get ever smaller, requiring ever more
policing power to prevent a rebellion from resulting, resulting in
even less money getting distributed to the people, requiring even
more money be given to the policing needed to prevent rebellion,
until the country is just a feudal system in which the Feudal Lords
are called bureaucrats.


LGDB: well communism by definition is a classless society, so if only government bureaucrats control the means of production that's a sharp class difference and thus not communism.  But besides the semantics if the idea is regardless of the situation things will always get worse or decay or there's always entropy, I'm not really sure that that's more than a quietism, politics will only get worse regardless of what we try.  I'm not sure how useful the political pessimism really is.


And more importantly there's a pretty strong differentiation right up top:  with communism, people are trying to achieve a classless society where no one class privately owns the levers of power.  And they might fail even most of the time, but capitalism just accepts as a positive good the unequal, private control of society.  So based on my values I don't see them as equivalent systems.

And I think tribalism is bad sure, but that's also a bit vague.   What is the answer?  Just surrendering to tribalism?  Accept that no politics can overcome tribalism?  That's not a problem for communism, it's a problem for any political project.

Also, could you respond to the idea that the Iron Law of Oligarchy was coined by a literal fascist?  I don't think that's something we wanna gloss over.


cheers,
--- the late great Donald Blake



Posted with Google Chrome 96.0.4664.104 on Linux
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software