• naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Don’t put words in my mouth, democracy has nothing to do with getting what you want is has to do with participation and voice in the decision making process.

    We have almost no representation in government, no choice as to whether or not we are bound by it, we have no democracy at work, deciding economic priorities anything like that.

    You’ve been told you live in a democracy but aside from being told that what evidence is there that you do? Can you even fire the government? Your boss? Do you really have a voice?

    here’s a Democratic government.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zapatista_Army_of_National_Liberation

    • Stephen Darby :ma_flag_aus:@mastodon.au
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      @naevaTheRat violent overthrow is one way of changing government. Conservative forces can also stage a coup. Once the new government has power, what then? Appoint ourself as the head of secret police. Then we are back at the start. Just different people being oppressed. I confess my outlook is far more menshevik and gradual. Apologist really. A gradual conservative coup seems to be under way in Australia.

        • Stephen Darby :ma_flag_aus:@mastodon.au
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          @naevaTheRat Not really familiar with the Zapatista movement. “Can you even fire the government?” Was your question. What is the point of having ideal governance if it can be fired? You are correct in that we vote seldom for a party rather than for policy. I am not sure anarchy is a great alternative

          • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            I want some of whatever you’re on, this is incoherent. The gov system you’re defending can be fired by the GG or through a DD resolution. Mechanisms to fire governments are in all non totalitarian systems I’m aware of.

            Suppose you vote me in on my platform of not killing you, but surprise! I lied! you can’t hold me accountable for 3 (or 6!) years. That is obviously messed the fuck up, if you have no power to recall me I’m not representing you, I’m just someone who convinced you to give me some power for a while.

            why do you dream so small? why are you convinced that it’s this pathetic little dribble of political power or we murder each other in the streets. Fuck dude, anarchic societies are usually pretty peaceful even in the case of zero external government. Anthropologists have spilled a lot of ink on this.

              • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                I don’t really know what you mean? anarchy can involve centralised decisions but only by consent.

                E.g. agreeing to follow to plan of someone for laying out a community garden is anarchic if you are not obligated to do so.

                Actual anarchy in the real world often involves lots of committees and community groups both explicit and customary. It’s hard to do much without organisation, but the difference is bottom up “we want a garden so we form a committee to plan it” vs top down “We are building a garden here for your community enrichment” “but we want a sports ground here” “silence peasants”

                  • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    Anarchy just means without heirarchy. I only brought it up in passing that humans are actually pretty cool and it takes a lot for us to be violent and horrible. Like in societies with no central government people are usually pretty fine so the sort of lockeian “red in tooth and claw state of nature” argument as a defense of this shitty compromise governance apparently holding us back from chaos doesn’t actually stand.

                    Cards on the table I am an anarchist, I think humans are broadly awesome and wonderful apes. I think we do bad stuff when faced with very non ape-compatible choices like whether to deploy militaries but most of those are only enabled by supressing our anarchic tendencies.

                    When we have to resolve disputes like taking out the garbage, who’s round is it at the pub, should we support a school’s project etc we’re really cool and sensitive. It’s why I believe in proper democracy, even stuff like the mondragon corporation do so much better because of democracy.