Restructure the US Government

[Thermodolia]

No comrade this is glorious Stalinism not that anti-party revisionist Maoism.

this but ironically

Well what else am i supposed to do this thread is shit. What I’m supposed to act serious?

[Senkaku]

this but ironically

Well what else am i supposed to do this thread is shit. What I’m supposed to act serious?

fair

I propose an immediate installation of the National Posadist Party as the supreme authority of the new Pan-American Workers' Front

[Torrocca]

wtf lmao

Well, in your own words you'd like to create a militia to defend this 'anarchist state', correct? Obviously they would have to have access to a large quantity of weapons and equipment in order to stand up against an actual, organized military. Then there's the inherent problem of hierarchy and chain-of-command, which is necessary for any armed group to be able to operate efficiently. I mean, even militia's have leaders. All it takes is a drought, famine, natural disaster, foreign invasion, or some other tragedy in order for this pseudo-military to take over and restore the very law and order you abolished.

Way to completely misrepresent my idea here lmao.

First, there's no state; the militias form of their own will and everyone's technically a member of them, either playing a supporting role or fighting directly.

Secondly:

"Later it became the fashion to decry the militias, and therefore to pretend that the faults which were due to lack of training and weapons were the result of the equalitarian system. Actually, a newly raised draft 'of militia was an undisciplined mob not because the officers called the private 'Comrade' but because raw troops are always an undisciplined mob. In practice the democratic 'revolutionary' type of discipline is more reliable than might be expected. In a workers' army discipline is theoretically voluntary. It is based on class-loyalty, whereas the discipline of a bourgeois conscript army is based ultimately on fear. (The Popular Army that replaced the militias was midway between the two types.) In the militias the bullying and abuse that go on in an ordinary army would never have been tolerated for a moment. The normal military punishments existed, but they were only invoked for very serious offences. When a man refused to obey an order you did not immediately get him punished; you first appealed to him in the name of comradeship. Cynical people with no experience of handling men will say instantly that this would never 'work', but as a matter of fact it does 'work' in the long run. The discipline of even the worst drafts of militia visibly improved as time went on. In January the job of keeping a dozen raw recruits up to the mark almost turned my hair grey. In May for a short while I was acting-lieutenant in command of about thirty men, English and Spanish. We had all been under fire for months, and I never had the slightest difficulty in getting an order obeyed or in getting men to volunteer for a dangerous job. 'Revolutionary' discipline depends on political consciousness--on an understanding of why orders must be obeyed; it takes time to diffuse this, but it also takes time to drill a man into an automaton on the barrack-square. The journalists who sneered at the militia-system seldom remembered that the militias had to hold the line while the Popular Army was training in the rear. And it is a tribute to the strength of 'revolutionary' discipline that the militias stayed in the field-at all." - Orwell.

[Strength and Order]

I like how you avoided the flaw I pointed out in your comparison by attempted redirection.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraklonas

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Byzantine_emperors

Quite a few deposed by the Senate, assassinated by their court, etc. :^)

So in other words, this:

A court with less assassinations, of course. Until, obviously, your el macho strongman there garners enough under-the-table support from the more feeble members of the party as well as a personal cult anyways because that's just gonna happen no matter what, and then he has all those lacking in faith and loyalty to him systematically executed and names himself God Emperor/Fuhrer for life/Il Duce of this new Fascist state.

Wouldn't happen then?

Anarchists removed him from the power of his own life in 1945, but that's beside the point.

The answer you're looking for is the 'Grand Council of Fascism'.

[Strength and Order]

Well, in your own words you'd like to create a militia to defend this 'anarchist state', correct? Obviously they would have to have access to a large quantity of weapons and equipment in order to stand up against an actual, organized military. Then there's the inherent problem of hierarchy and chain-of-command, which is necessary for any armed group to be able to operate efficiently. I mean, even militia's have leaders. All it takes is a drought, famine, natural disaster, foreign invasion, or some other tragedy in order for this pseudo-military to take over and restore the very law and order you abolished.

Way to completely misrepresent my idea here lmao.

First, there's no state; the militias form of their own will and everyone's technically a member of them, either playing a supporting role or fighting directly.

Secondly:

"Later it became the fashion to decry the militias, and therefore to pretend that the faults which were due to lack of training and weapons were the result of the equalitarian system. Actually, a newly raised draft 'of militia was an undisciplined mob not because the officers called the private 'Comrade' but because raw troops are always an undisciplined mob. In practice the democratic 'revolutionary' type of discipline is more reliable than might be expected. In a workers' army discipline is theoretically voluntary. It is based on class-loyalty, whereas the discipline of a bourgeois conscript army is based ultimately on fear. (The Popular Army that replaced the militias was midway between the two types.) In the militias the bullying and abuse that go on in an ordinary army would never have been tolerated for a moment. The normal military punishments existed, but they were only invoked for very serious offences. When a man refused to obey an order you did not immediately get him punished; you first appealed to him in the name of comradeship. Cynical people with no experience of handling men will say instantly that this would never 'work', but as a matter of fact it does 'work' in the long run. The discipline of even the worst drafts of militia visibly improved as time went on. In January the job of keeping a dozen raw recruits up to the mark almost turned my hair grey. In May for a short while I was acting-lieutenant in command of about thirty men, English and Spanish. We had all been under fire for months, and I never had the slightest difficulty in getting an order obeyed or in getting men to volunteer for a dangerous job. 'Revolutionary' discipline depends on political consciousness--on an understanding of why orders must be obeyed; it takes time to diffuse this, but it also takes time to drill a man into an automaton on the barrack-square. The journalists who sneered at the militia-system seldom remembered that the militias had to hold the line while the Popular Army was training in the rear. And it is a tribute to the strength of 'revolutionary' discipline that the militias stayed in the field-at all." - Orwell.

If they form of their own volition then what's to stop them from seizing power of their own volition? In fact, what's to stop other groups from establishing new states before a militia can be created, or even fighting and defeating said militias and seizing power?

[New Excalibus]

*Sigh*
What the US needs to do is become more liberal, and eliminate the Electoral College.
That would fix quite a bit of problems.

[Strength and Order]

*Sigh*
What the US needs to do is become more liberal, and eliminate the Electoral College.
That would fix quite a bit of problems.

Liberalism creates more problems than it fixes.

[Farnhamia]

this but ironically

Well what else am i supposed to do this thread is shit. What I’m supposed to act serious?

You could just not post in the thread. I know, I know, easier said than done but consider it a challenge.

[New Excalibus]

Way to completely misrepresent my idea here lmao.

First, there's no state; the militias form of their own will and everyone's technically a member of them, either playing a supporting role or fighting directly.

Secondly:

"Later it became the fashion to decry the militias, and therefore to pretend that the faults which were due to lack of training and weapons were the result of the equalitarian system. Actually, a newly raised draft 'of militia was an undisciplined mob not because the officers called the private 'Comrade' but because raw troops are always an undisciplined mob. In practice the democratic 'revolutionary' type of discipline is more reliable than might be expected. In a workers' army discipline is theoretically voluntary. It is based on class-loyalty, whereas the discipline of a bourgeois conscript army is based ultimately on fear. (The Popular Army that replaced the militias was midway between the two types.) In the militias the bullying and abuse that go on in an ordinary army would never have been tolerated for a moment. The normal military punishments existed, but they were only invoked for very serious offences. When a man refused to obey an order you did not immediately get him punished; you first appealed to him in the name of comradeship. Cynical people with no experience of handling men will say instantly that this would never 'work', but as a matter of fact it does 'work' in the long run. The discipline of even the worst drafts of militia visibly improved as time went on. In January the job of keeping a dozen raw recruits up to the mark almost turned my hair grey. In May for a short while I was acting-lieutenant in command of about thirty men, English and Spanish. We had all been under fire for months, and I never had the slightest difficulty in getting an order obeyed or in getting men to volunteer for a dangerous job. 'Revolutionary' discipline depends on political consciousness--on an understanding of why orders must be obeyed; it takes time to diffuse this, but it also takes time to drill a man into an automaton on the barrack-square. The journalists who sneered at the militia-system seldom remembered that the militias had to hold the line while the Popular Army was training in the rear. And it is a tribute to the strength of 'revolutionary' discipline that the militias stayed in the field-at all." - Orwell.

If they form of their own volition then what's to stop them from seizing power of their own volition? In fact, what's to stop other groups from establishing new states before a militia can be created, or even fighting and defeating said militias and seizing power?

Okay, it's a... unique idea, but, seriously, no one beats the US military-wise.
Unless they got support from Russia or China, no one is going to win against the US.

[Torrocca]

Way to completely misrepresent my idea here lmao.

First, there's no state; the militias form of their own will and everyone's technically a member of them, either playing a supporting role or fighting directly.

Secondly:

"Later it became the fashion to decry the militias, and therefore to pretend that the faults which were due to lack of training and weapons were the result of the equalitarian system. Actually, a newly raised draft 'of militia was an undisciplined mob not because the officers called the private 'Comrade' but because raw troops are always an undisciplined mob. In practice the democratic 'revolutionary' type of discipline is more reliable than might be expected. In a workers' army discipline is theoretically voluntary. It is based on class-loyalty, whereas the discipline of a bourgeois conscript army is based ultimately on fear. (The Popular Army that replaced the militias was midway between the two types.) In the militias the bullying and abuse that go on in an ordinary army would never have been tolerated for a moment. The normal military punishments existed, but they were only invoked for very serious offences. When a man refused to obey an order you did not immediately get him punished; you first appealed to him in the name of comradeship. Cynical people with no experience of handling men will say instantly that this would never 'work', but as a matter of fact it does 'work' in the long run. The discipline of even the worst drafts of militia visibly improved as time went on. In January the job of keeping a dozen raw recruits up to the mark almost turned my hair grey. In May for a short while I was acting-lieutenant in command of about thirty men, English and Spanish. We had all been under fire for months, and I never had the slightest difficulty in getting an order obeyed or in getting men to volunteer for a dangerous job. 'Revolutionary' discipline depends on political consciousness--on an understanding of why orders must be obeyed; it takes time to diffuse this, but it also takes time to drill a man into an automaton on the barrack-square. The journalists who sneered at the militia-system seldom remembered that the militias had to hold the line while the Popular Army was training in the rear. And it is a tribute to the strength of 'revolutionary' discipline that the militias stayed in the field-at all." - Orwell.

If they form of their own volition then what's to stop them from seizing power of their own volition?

Other groups/members within that specific group dialectically opposed to that? What even is giving everyone a gun and ammo anyway?

In fact, what's to stop other groups from establishing new states before a militia can be created, or even fighting and defeating said militias and seizing power?

Good luck trying to get that to happen if everyone's already happy to not have a state ruling over them, especially in a place like America. :^)

[Torrocca]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraklonas

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Byzantine_emperors

Quite a few deposed by the Senate, assassinated by their court, etc. :^)

So in other words, this:

A court with less assassinations, of course. Until, obviously, your el macho strongman there garners enough under-the-table support from the more feeble members of the party as well as a personal cult anyways because that's just gonna happen no matter what, and then he has all those lacking in faith and loyalty to him systematically executed and names himself God Emperor/Fuhrer for life/Il Duce of this new Fascist state.

Wouldn't happen then?

Nah, it has a reasonable chance to. Either that or some party member schemes his way to the top and does the same thing. I bet you don't think the Night of Long Knives has the chance of recreation in your Fascist utopia, though, because you somehow think Nazism is Socialism because of the name. :^)

[Atkemri]

Great ideas everyone, but I have a better one. Keep it the exact same.

[New Excalibus]

*Sigh*
What the US needs to do is become more liberal, and eliminate the Electoral College.
That would fix quite a bit of problems.

Liberalism creates more problems than it fixes.

It's still much better for the people than the economy-obsessed conservatives.

[Dark Socialism]

I would just have a Absolutist Monarchy. I don't know who the monarch would be but until a person that fits the place is found I'd just have a council of intellectuals and a Dictator guide America.

[Strength and Order]

Other groups/members within that specific group dialectically opposed to that? What even is giving everyone a gun and ammo anyway?

So civil war, then? Only one that could potentially result in the death of half of a community's population? Surely this could never go wrong.

Good luck trying to get that to happen if everyone's already happy to not have a state ruling over them, especially in a place like America. :^)

And why would they be happy without law and order? I don't believe many people in Syria are happy right now.

Nah, it has a reasonable chance to. Either that or some party member schemes his way to the top and does the same thing. I bet you don't think the Night of Long Knives has the chance of recreation in your Fascist utopia, though, because you somehow think Nazism is Socialism because of the name. :^)

Wrong, that is what the paramilitary wing of the party is for: to preserve ideological purity.

And don't call fascism utopian, that would be anarchism. Our ideology is grounded in reality, not fantasy.

[Strength and Order]

Liberalism creates more problems than it fixes.

It's still much better for the people than the economy-obsessed conservatives.

I believe you mean 'plutocratic neoconservative capitalists'.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Every day we stray further from God closer to Beijing

No comrade this is glorious Stalinism not that anti-party revisionist Maoism.

Don't lie Therm, you're just a red fascist.

[Torrocca]

Other groups/members within that specific group dialectically opposed to that? What even is giving everyone a gun and ammo anyway?

So civil war, then? Only one that could potentially result in the death of half of a community's population? Surely this could never go wrong.

Only if that former group attacks the others.

Good luck trying to get that to happen if everyone's already happy to not have a state ruling over them, especially in a place like America. :^)

And why would they be happy without law and order? I don't believe many people in Syria are happy right now.

Syria's also not Anarchist, so your point's meaningless.

Nah, it has a reasonable chance to. Either that or some party member schemes his way to the top and does the same thing. I bet you don't think the Night of Long Knives has the chance of recreation in your Fascist utopia, though, because you somehow think Nazism is Socialism because of the name. :^)

Wrong, that is what the paramilitary wing of the party is for: to preserve ideological purity.

And what if they decide that the strongman in charge is the one preserving the ideology's purity, and not the weaker betas below him in the party's hierarchy?

And don't call fascism utopian, that would be anarchism. Our ideology is grounded in reality, not fantasy.

L O L

[Thermodolia]

No comrade this is glorious Stalinism not that anti-party revisionist Maoism.

Don't lie Therm, you're just a red fascist.

N-n-no. I-I would never.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Don't lie Therm, you're just a red fascist.

N-n-no. I-I would never.

Come Therm, we can create a Grand Council together.

[Thermodolia]

N-n-no. I-I would never.

Come Therm, we can create a Grand Council together.

Sounds great

[A Cornstar]

short answer: turn it into A cornstar

[Thermodolia]

short answer: turn it into A cornstar

Sounds fucking shit. Feudalism? God that’s dumb

[Strength and Order]

So civil war, then? Only one that could potentially result in the death of half of a community's population? Surely this could never go wrong.

Only if that former group attacks the others.

You've given no reason this wouldn't happen.

Syria's also not Anarchist, so your point's meaningless.

War is the closest human beings will ever come to actual anarchism, like it or not.

And what if they decide that the strongman in charge is the one preserving the ideology's purity, and not the weaker betas below him in the party's hierarchy?

Indoctrination and propaganda of course.

[Strength and Order]

short answer: turn it into A cornstar

Sounds fucking shit. Feudalism? God that’s dumb

Feudalism was a mistake.