LWDT V: Completing the Five Thread Plan

[Democratic Communist Federation]

When NSG turns insane because of me kids who are out of school.

It is not unique to NationStates. It has been a problem on every single online forum I have been on since the early 1990s.

[Reikoku]

TFW you should read Gramsci, but are too lazy.

You absolutely should. It's a bit kooky at times (understandable, given the whole "written in fascist jail" thing), but definitely worth it. It's a good basis if you're interested in cultural studies from a Marxist perspective.

Marxism does not interest me in the least tbh, I'm mostly interested in Gramsci's idealism and autoctisi which are addressed in his works.

[Liriena]

You absolutely should. It's a bit kooky at times (understandable, given the whole "written in fascist jail" thing), but definitely worth it. It's a good basis if you're interested in cultural studies from a Marxist perspective.

Marxism does not interest me in the least tbh, I'm mostly interested in Gramsci's idealism and autoctisi which are addressed in his works.

Oh, that's alright.

His stuff on folklore and common sense is also pretty good, imho.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

This thread seems a bit dead. What do we all think of compulsory voting? Personally, I despise it, and I despise my country for employing it.

[Bakery Hill]

This thread seems a bit dead. What do we all think of compulsory voting? Personally, I despise it, and I despise my country for employing it.

It doesn't keep me awake at night.

[Dumb Ideologies]

One of the main issues that stops me fully aligning with socialism is the near-complete cessation of economic activity that would occur during a not-insubstantial transition period.

We rely heavily on very complicated just-in-time supply systems these days and with the overthrow of ownership the supply chain would be thrown into chaos as workers tried to establish how to get it moving again and supply sources from abroad dried up completely as companies would turn off the supply tap to those that were no longer under their ownership.

The practicalities of getting the economy moving again would, even if you're eventually advocating (as I would) market socialism, require huge state intervention and a necessarily authoritarian stance that could very easily set the standard. People would panic and loot to ensure they could feed their families, and with basic utilities such as electricity and water possibly offline as well there would likely be many deaths among the weak in the intermediary chaos.

Convince me I'm wrong. Ideologically I can believe that the end system would be better, but the getting there? Not in my lifetime, please. And so I must support social democracy and only the nationalisation of key infrastructure, an institutional say for workers, government support for worker-run businesses, and the transfer of failed businesses (once made profitable) to workers. Realistically that ends with a moderate mixed economy, not socialism.

I made the above post a few pages back but in all the shenanigans it disappeared into obscurity quite quickly. Any thoughts?

[Ostroeuropa]

One of the main issues that stops me fully aligning with socialism is the near-complete cessation of economic activity that would occur during a not-insubstantial transition period.

We rely heavily on very complicated just-in-time supply systems these days and with the overthrow of ownership the supply chain would be thrown into chaos as workers tried to establish how to get it moving again and supply sources from abroad dried up completely as companies would turn off the supply tap to those that were no longer under their ownership.

The practicalities of getting the economy moving again would, even if you're eventually advocating (as I would) market socialism, require huge state intervention and a necessarily authoritarian stance that could very easily set the standard. People would panic and loot to ensure they could feed their families, and with basic utilities such as electricity and water possibly offline as well there would likely be many deaths among the weak in the intermediary chaos.

Convince me I'm wrong. Ideologically I can believe that the end system would be better, but the getting there? Not in my lifetime, please. And so I must support social democracy and only the nationalisation of key infrastructure, an institutional say for workers, government support for worker-run businesses, and the transfer of failed businesses (once made profitable) to workers. Realistically that ends with a moderate mixed economy, not socialism.

I made the above post a few pages back but in all the shenanigans it disappeared into obscurity quite quickly. Any thoughts?

Changes to inheritance taxation could transition us to market socialism.
Allow them to pay only 50% of it if they transfer some amount of stock to worker/union (held on behalf of all) control as a compromise, etc. It'll be big and beautiful corporatist corruption in favor of market socialism, so it might actually pass.

[Pilarcraft]

One of the main issues that stops me fully aligning with socialism is the near-complete cessation of economic activity that would occur during a not-insubstantial transition period.

We rely heavily on very complicated just-in-time supply systems these days and with the overthrow of ownership the supply chain would be thrown into chaos as workers tried to establish how to get it moving again and supply sources from abroad dried up completely as companies would turn off the supply tap to those that were no longer under their ownership.

The practicalities of getting the economy moving again would, even if you're eventually advocating (as I would) market socialism, require huge state intervention and a necessarily authoritarian stance that could very easily set the standard. People would panic and loot to ensure they could feed their families, and with basic utilities such as electricity and water possibly offline as well there would likely be many deaths among the weak in the intermediary chaos.

Convince me I'm wrong. Ideologically I can believe that the end system would be better, but the getting there? Not in my lifetime, please. And so I must support social democracy and only the nationalisation of key infrastructure, an institutional say for workers, government support for worker-run businesses, and the transfer of failed businesses (once made profitable) to workers. Realistically that ends with a moderate mixed economy, not socialism.

I made the above post a few pages back but in all the shenanigans it disappeared into obscurity quite quickly. Any thoughts?

Can't say I disagree with you. A problem with such revolutionary (and I don't mean that as the violent peasants rising with pitchforks kind of revolution) changes is that... well, they're sudden changes. People get caught off guard. And Economy is a goddamn large part of people's lives, whether they realize it or not. The process of collectivizing every piece of private means of production (and that is if we don't, like, collectivize land that isn't used for economic means, and other similar forms of private property) and then the debate/conflict over whether or not it's even state industry or collective industry alone would mean that you get a large part of your lives in shambles. But of course, that can be fixed if we collectivize (or, rather, nationalize and then collectivize) the more important sectors like energy, power, etc.) through a longer process before we suddenly go "capitalism is now in the dustbin of the history all hail the revolution"

[Asherahan]

This thread seems a bit dead. What do we all think of compulsory voting? Personally, I despise it, and I despise my country for employing it.

It should be employed. If you don't vote your subjecting yourself to the will of people that maybe lesser than you.

[Pilarcraft]

This thread seems a bit dead. What do we all think of compulsory voting? Personally, I despise it, and I despise my country for employing it.

Democracy ought to be participatory. Sure, I hate it that most people are politically apathetic, but the idea of forcing people to vote means forcing them to choose between the options already available. Unless they add a "Neither" or "I don't want to vote" option to the sheet, democracy ought to be participatory.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

This thread seems a bit dead. What do we all think of compulsory voting? Personally, I despise it, and I despise my country for employing it.

It should be employed. If you don't vote your subjecting yourself to the will of people that maybe lesser than you.

If you want to subject yourself to the will of the people without giving input, is that not your choice?

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

This thread seems a bit dead. What do we all think of compulsory voting? Personally, I despise it, and I despise my country for employing it.

It doesn't keep me awake at night.

The idea that the government can put you in jail for staying home on voting day is repulsive to me.

[Dumb Ideologies]

I made the above post a few pages back but in all the shenanigans it disappeared into obscurity quite quickly. Any thoughts?

Can't say I disagree with you. A problem with such revolutionary (and I don't mean that as the violent peasants rising with pitchforks kind of revolution) changes is that... well, they're sudden changes. People get caught off guard. And Economy is a goddamn large part of people's lives, whether they realize it or not. The process of collectivizing every piece of private means of production (and that is if we don't, like, collectivize land that isn't used for economic means, and other similar forms of private property) and then the debate/conflict over whether or not it's even state industry or collective industry alone would mean that you get a large part of your lives in shambles. But of course, that can be fixed if we collectivize (or, rather, nationalize and then collectivize) the more important sectors like energy, power, etc.) through a longer process before we suddenly go "capitalism is now in the dustbin of the history all hail the revolution"

I think many get so lost in ideals that they lose sight of the practicality and would find themselves stuck and stumbling around into doing very bad things if their moment in history arose.

I think I'm guilty to some extent of the opposite error. Constantly asking "but how?" "what might that look like" and "how could that go wrong" to the extent that it's politically immobilising; I can't fully commit to any political programme without a partial layer of irony because I'm always hyperaware of its potential weaknesses.

[Bakery Hill]

It doesn't keep me awake at night.

The idea that the government can put you in jail for staying home on voting day is repulsive to me.

How many people are in Australian gaols for not voting? You can say "I was sick" or "I was out of town" and you don't even get a fine.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

The idea that the government can put you in jail for staying home on voting day is repulsive to me.

How many people are in Australian gaols for not voting? You can say "I was sick" or "I was out of town" and you don't even get a fine.

And if you say "I didn't feel like it," what happens? You get fined. If you don't pay the fine, you could theoretically go to jail (though, it's rarely enforced up to that point. You shouldn't illegalize anything unless you're prepared to send people to jail for it.

[Bakery Hill]

How many people are in Australian gaols for not voting? You can say "I was sick" or "I was out of town" and you don't even get a fine.

And if you say "I didn't feel like it," what happens? You get fined. If you don't pay the fine, you could theoretically go to jail (though, it's rarely enforced up to that point. You shouldn't illegalize anything unless you're prepared to send people to jail for it.

There's far too many "ifs" in that post. This is a non-issue here because no-one's ever heard of anyone being jailed for not voting. It's really as simple as lying or coughing up twenty dollars. The most I've heard happen is the RTA tacking the fine on when you renew your licence.

[United Muscovite Nations]

One of the main issues that stops me fully aligning with socialism is the near-complete cessation of economic activity that would occur during a not-insubstantial transition period.

We rely heavily on very complicated just-in-time supply systems these days and with the overthrow of ownership the supply chain would be thrown into chaos as workers tried to establish how to get it moving again and supply sources from abroad dried up completely as companies would turn off the supply tap to those that were no longer under their ownership.

The practicalities of getting the economy moving again would, even if you're eventually advocating (as I would) market socialism, require huge state intervention and a necessarily authoritarian stance that could very easily set the standard. People would panic and loot to ensure they could feed their families, and with basic utilities such as electricity and water possibly offline as well there would likely be many deaths among the weak in the intermediary chaos.

Convince me I'm wrong. Ideologically I can believe that the end system would be better, but the getting there? Not in my lifetime, please. And so I must support social democracy and only the nationalisation of key infrastructure, an institutional say for workers, government support for worker-run businesses, and the transfer of failed businesses (once made profitable) to workers. Realistically that ends with a moderate mixed economy, not socialism.

I'm not sure it's necessarily a problem with socialism but with all drastic restructuring of an economy. We saw in the former Soviet Union in the 1990's (and in some republics, to this day) just how bad such a swift change can be for an economy.

[Ostroeuropa]

Can't say I disagree with you. A problem with such revolutionary (and I don't mean that as the violent peasants rising with pitchforks kind of revolution) changes is that... well, they're sudden changes. People get caught off guard. And Economy is a goddamn large part of people's lives, whether they realize it or not. The process of collectivizing every piece of private means of production (and that is if we don't, like, collectivize land that isn't used for economic means, and other similar forms of private property) and then the debate/conflict over whether or not it's even state industry or collective industry alone would mean that you get a large part of your lives in shambles. But of course, that can be fixed if we collectivize (or, rather, nationalize and then collectivize) the more important sectors like energy, power, etc.) through a longer process before we suddenly go "capitalism is now in the dustbin of the history all hail the revolution"

I think many get so lost in ideals that they lose sight of the practicality and would find themselves stuck and stumbling around into doing very bad things if their moment in history arose.

I think I'm guilty to some extent of the opposite error. Constantly asking "but how?" "what might that look like" and "how could that go wrong" to the extent that it's politically immobilising; I can't fully commit to any political programme without a partial layer of irony because I'm always hyperaware of its potential weaknesses.

We do politics wrong. No worldview, no lens, is a panacea. They are useful, but strict adherence to an ideology will make you incapable of dealing with some problems as you run into its failures to accurately describe reality and its ideas become dysfunctional. It's like any materialistic pursuit. Ideally we'd deal with problems as they arise and adjust our ideologies to incorporate them, incrementally improving them, but I guess people would rather just get angry about it and deny their ideologies are dumb and broken and point out other peoples are more dumbererer and more broken.

I call myself a nationalist, a syndicalist and such, but that's a trend. as soon as I think those lenses are not conducive to human happiness and development on an issue, I reach for another lens.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

This thread seems a bit dead. What do we all think of compulsory voting? Personally, I despise it, and I despise my country for employing it.

Personally, I don't care about bourgeois democracy. However, under proletarian democracy, I think people must be free to vote or not vote, as their conscience dictates.

[The South Falls]

This thread seems a bit dead. What do we all think of compulsory voting? Personally, I despise it, and I despise my country for employing it.

Compulsory voting doesn't make sense. People can vote, or not vote. It's their right, and they can choose to use it. Compulsory voting is compulsory, therefore undemocratic. Compulsory voting, just because it has "voting" in it, is directly against the theory of democracy.

[Dumb Ideologies]

We do politics wrong. No worldview, no lens, is a panacea. They are useful, but strict adherence to an ideology will make you incapable of dealing with some problems as you run into its failures to accurately describe reality and its ideas become dysfunctional. It's like any materialistic pursuit. Ideally we'd deal with problems as they arise and adjust our ideologies to incorporate them, incrementally improving them, but I guess people would rather just get angry about it and deny their ideologies are dumb and broken and point out other peoples are more dumbererer and more broken.

I call myself a nationalist, a syndicalist and such, but that's a trend. as soon as I think those lenses are not conducive to human happiness and development on an issue, I reach for another lens.

I'm not sure it's necessarily a problem with socialism but with all drastic restructuring of an economy. We saw in the former Soviet Union in the 1990's (and in some republics, to this day) just how bad such a swift change can be for an economy.

Hmm. Both these have given me something to think about. Cheers.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

I made the above post a few pages back but in all the shenanigans it disappeared into obscurity quite quickly. Any thoughts?

Some people have argued that socialism can only be established, globally, after a complete disaster. People would literally be given no choice but to change the system in some way. Of course, there is no guarantee that the new system would be better than the old one.

[Auze]

Not that all school kids flood us with stupid comments just a general tendency that we've noticed.

does seem like that would be likely

Here is a screencap from last summer's thread titles

Link to see the threads of that time.

[Post-PRC China]

does seem like that would be likely

Here is a screencap from last summer's thread titles

Link to see the threads of that time.

Slavery reparations. Wow.

[Pilarcraft]

does seem like that would be likely

Here is a screencap from last summer's thread titles

Link to see the threads of that time.

This is fucking gold, I stg