the reality is that anarchy beckons
the reality is that anarchy beckons
You're viewing a single thread.
26 comments
-
Throwing the gauntlet: provide an achievable modern government and economic structure to replace the existing one. Not just a few glib phrases, actual proto-legislation. Design it to stand for the next 300+ years.
Anarchy doesn't last long, and people will form tribes.
Part two: Now start a movement to push for the adoption of your models.
May the odds be ever in your favor.
-
Ahh yes, my favorite fallacy, 'don't complain about anything you can't personally fix in it's entirety right now in this comment section'
I hope you never complain about AI, Global Warming, or any Foreign Relations spats including wars, famine and genocide without having a fully detailed report on how to fix it.
Do we see how fucking silly that sounds now?
-
Demanding the individual reform an entire system is legitimately hilarious once you step back and look at the logic of it.
-
Its literally just the 'yet you participate in society' meme but with a different punchline.
-
Every movement starts with 1 person deciding they want better.
-
An individual with unlimited authority and power would reshape society into their own vision which could be better or worse. But, by its nature, such focused power would never fall into the hands of a good person.
-
-
-
Is it ok if I pass on your fantasy in a meme posting community? 300 years! lol!
-
Sure. No companies over 100 million in revenue. Every single one gets split.
Citizens United? Gone, obviously.
Tax breaks for collective ownership, extreme tax hikes on any person or institution with assets valued at $500 million or more
That's like 80% of the problem solved right there
-
Implementation of rank choice voting nation wide, dissolution of political parties entirely or at least these two. People need to know the candidates they're voting for beyond a single letter. Institute the popular vote, down with the electoral college. Make senate seats based on state size with a minimum of 2 so that the land locked right wing states don't hold the power anymore. Capital gains tax increase and reinstatement of the "death tax" as they loved to call it. Damn, it's like we HAVE answers, just people so up in their behinds aren't listening.
-
I disagree with the Senate... We should just get rid of it. It was meant as a check on the will of the people by the elites, but not only is that undemocratic, it's an unnecessary check that prevents Congress as a whole from doing anything, including checking the executive branch (as we see now)
But the rest of those, totally
-
Fair enough, dissolving the senate would be viable if everything else was implemented.
-
-
-
No companies over 100 million in revenue. Every single one gets split.
I think this is a simplistic view. Sure, it would help, but not much, and only temporarily.
Because then the next thing that happens is that you have shell companies, indirect usage contracts, and a lot of messed up complicated complex systems to circumvent the rules. I mean, that's already what's happening, if you consider how companies avoid taxation by shuffling money abroad, but it could be even worse.
I think that the fate of a country, or (avoiding the term "country" because it's too closely related to Nationalism) region or group of people is largely dependent on the nature and quality of the people and their ability and more important willingness to do good for the group. Like, if you have assholes in your society, no matter what law you come up with, assholes will always find a way to enrich themselves by fucking up society. No rule can prevent that. You really just need well-meaning people at the top to make rules and decisions. That's not something you can avoid by just implementing a different rule-book, because who makes sure these rules are actually followed? You need people for that too, and there it starts being a circular problem. I think.
-
You're just expressing the core problem of liberalism... If you write clear boundaries, inevitably people will seek to exploit the rules
That's the other 20%. Enforcement.
My rule didn't have such a loophole. You made one up, and in doing so broke it several times over. Every holding company has a revenue over the limit, and they're really all just one big company anyways
A liberal would scramble to adjust the rules while ceeding ground, because they defend ownership like it's a virtue
I would say fuck you, you know you not only broke the rules but tried to cheat them, so not only are your companies getting split you're losing all of them. Maybe jail time, maybe we just ban you from holding a corporate charter for life
The law is only what you enforce, we can't continue to have a legal system based on wordplay. It's a cultural issue we need to fix
-
continue to have a legal system based on wordplay
that's exactly what we're actually having today. i think the term for that is legalism, i.e. deciding what is right and what is wrong based on what is written in the law, without considering anything else like context or subjective opinion of the judge.
-
That's right, I'd argue we're even past that though... We're at a place where the supreme Court is humoring grammar based arguments to create constitutional powers never mentioned anywhere
It's honestly civilization ending
-
-
-
-
-
300+ years
Wow there buddy don't get ahead of yourself, this nation is barely scraping by at 250
-
26 comments