this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2024
84 points (92.9% liked)

Asklemmy

43133 readers
2381 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This is the definition I am using:

a system, organization, or society in which people are chosen and moved into positions of success, power, and influence on the basis of their demonstrated abilities and merit.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 3 points 6 months ago (3 children)

The issue will always be reality. In theory, meritocracy and even geniocracy sounds promosing but so does our current system.

The reality is that incompetent or malicious people will always find ways to corrupt the idea.

At this point, Iโ€˜m pretty sure the only way to go forward is to think in new ways. Maybe general AI will work, or anarchy (more like anarcho communist probably).

We tried and broke everything:

  • representative democracy - politicians lie to get into office and do their thing after
  • autocracy - the person in charge freaks out and becomes a lifetime ruler
  • communism - people starve while the politicians become rich
  • monarchy - the bloodline will produce some idiot who breaks stuff - also no reason to be this rich
  • multiparty system - will get little done and devolves into populism as well
  • two party system - devolves into hating the other party

The real problem imo is that a few people just cant make decisions for the masses over an extended time. Its too much power and responsibility.

Iโ€˜m pretty sure a more direct democracy represents this day and age more since the majority sees how our world goes to shit.

[โ€“] DessertStorms@kbin.social 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

communism - people starve while the politicians become rich

making it, by definition, not communism.
https://medium.com/international-workers-press/misconceptions-about-communism-2e366f1ef51f

[โ€“] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Well, again theory vs reality.

Every iteration of communism so far was an absolute nightmare, made by the people for the people.

I agree that most theories are great if taken seriously but I dont see how we keep incompetence and malice from corrupting it.

My logic says weed out malice and educate the incompetent but no idea how to do this.

[โ€“] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The SU was pretty great until it came apart due to outside interference and ultimately illegally dissolved. People like to shit-talk the censorship (and to be fair under most circumstances I would be against it as well) but things didn't get bad until they started loosening up on it; once the citizens had no protection from the lies specifically created to destabilize their society it all came crumbling down.

Also China for all of its flaws is fucking killing it right now. They're genuinely on the path to full blown communism, with their strategy being to build up as much power as they can while they wait for the US empire to collapse. Once they're out of the picture, expect huge moves.

[โ€“] Danterious@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

or anarchy (more like anarcho communist probably).

I've come to a similar conclusion, however I still have some hold ups on how anarchism currently being implemented across the world.

It still relies on organizers and extra attention being diverted to certain individuals who give an agenda for what needs to be done next. This allows co-opting these movements to be a lot easier than if we could work past that.

[โ€“] DessertStorms@kbin.social 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I still have some hold ups on how anarchism currently being implemented across the world.

If you think there is someone implementing anarchism around the world, you have completely misunderstood anarchism.

It's like when the alt right tried framing antifa as an organisation.

The whole point of anarchism is that you do what your community needs you to do, and let other communities do the same.

[โ€“] Danterious@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 months ago

Yeah I agree that should be the ideal however, like you have said, it hasn't ever really been implemented yet.

There are a bunch of groups around the world that follow similar anarchist principles, like Rojava, Zapatistas, or even Temporary autonomous zones, but all of them have some unofficial/hidden/weak form of organizer that can be targeted by people with the right resources.

My point being that since systems tend to sustain themselves if we don't start building systems that can function without the need of an organizer or something of a similar sort then there will still be that place where the power can be misused.

Exactly. If anarchy (or a real, local, direct democracy to be precise) was to be born, it would take a long time to prepare. People need to be educated enough to lead their own lives and make decisions for themselves and their peers. Thats something that hasnt happened for centuries. People are born into worshipping hierarchy.

The most crucial thing is education in my book. Even the last person living under a rock should be able to get quality education without any cost or strings attached.

[โ€“] xilliah@beehaw.org 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

A direct democracy can be corrupted via social engineering, see brexit.

[โ€“] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Iโ€˜m not saying direct democracy cant be broken but britain isnt a direct democracy. Its like giving someone a bike who drove a car all their lives. They crash and hurt themselves and someone says โ€žlook! Bikes are dangerous!โ€œ

There are no direct (or mostly direct) democracies in the world afaik. Feel free to prove otherwise.

[โ€“] pranaless@beehaw.org 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I believe Switzerland has direct democracy, no?

In part, but not fully. They still have full time reprenstative offices. Direct democracy would get along without those afaik.

[โ€“] xilliah@beehaw.org 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Thanks. Iโ€˜m glad I explained it ok. :) have a good one.

[โ€“] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Brexit happened because the bri'ish are all a bunch of subhuman fascists. They all deep down wanted brexit because they hated foreigners more than they cared for themselves. All trolls had to do was bring that to the surface and give them the chance to actually act upon it.

[โ€“] xilliah@beehaw.org 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[โ€“] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

And they eat beans on toast

[didn't you have beans on toast like a week ago] (shut up, mom that doesn't count)