Definitely not saying it works pervasively, lots of jurisdictions work as plutocracies and have vacated any sense of public good. That some jurisdictions suck doesn’t nullify the possibilities of cooperation and public good being the foundations of good governance.
Governance, government and states are all different and nebulous within themselves. You can achieve governance models that better resist the consolidation of power while still operating towards the goal of the collective good. That alone does not denote nationalization, which is a particular form of statehood (often referred to as a sovereign state). Watershed governance is managed across existing levels of international, regional and local governing bodies, often with a high level of success to best ensure sufficient water is available for the communities within.
Certainly Lenin and good compatriots has the best of intentions with their vanguard approach to intention. But, as you noted, that concentration of power ultimately corrupted in the hands of a nefarious few. These ideas were not Lenin’s alone and even Marx promoted the idea of a Vanguard long before the Bolshevik revolution, which Bakunin (an early anarchist) was opposed due to the likelihood of the vanguard becoming entrenched within that power. That concentration of power by a class of elite was the mistake. To argue there wasn’t time to educate the masses is to ignore the fallout of that approach. These are important lessons to remember, even should the future approach to revolution be focused on the establishment of worker co-ops. Positions of power and power between cooperatives are likely to remain and we will need systems of control to mediate these types of emergent hierarchies.
Simple if you understand the theory and history. The main difference between Communists and anarchists is the involvement of the state.
Yes, but let’s try to achieve that without state ownership of the means.
The world would be a much better place if we placed nature’at least at the same level of care as we place generalized human need.
I used to wait until the last minute to board, until the time I had to put my carry on bag at the back of the plane and my personal item under the seat and ended up being the last person off. One of the more uncomfortable flights I’ve been on.
Only if he is elected, which hopefully never happens again.
I was initially drawn to Reddit as a place that offered nuanced conversation. I even used to engage with toxic takes if nothing less than to discredit their take. It’s a complete dumpster fire of toxic ass hats now - not worth commenting within as it’s becoming more and more of a conservative echo chamber.
They literally started their math is based on voting population in their post. Sure, this doesn’t account for cheating, but the Dems are also making headway on minimizing gerrymandering in a lot of swing states.
Siii
Or robin hooding it to weath transfer from the ultra rich as a form of wealth redistribution. I’d definitely pass my own pocket a little thicker, to your point, but the main thrust of power focusing on personal benefit would be very narrow and short lived in scope.
*Never will the USA government as it is currently established under the existing constitution and electoral process will these changes be made. It is very possible that the union could fail at any moment and history seems to indicate it’s probably not that far from a collapse as a nation.
Have you seen Hallmark films? The $$$ to finance them being made is the only skill required!
When does the whole second amendment kick in and people start using it to defend against authoritarian governments?
Clerks is definitely more iconic, but it feels like the transition from the 80s into the 90s. I put my vote with Mallrats, which is 90s through and thorough - hell, there’s even a 90210 reference delivered directly to Shannen Doherty.