• Zron@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Authoritarianism is cool when you’re the one being an authoritarian.

    Really sucks when someone you don’t agree with decides what is allowed or not.

    If you give a government power to decide who is allowed in the government, even if you think it’s for the right reasons, you’ve now created a system where all it takes is one or a few people to turn a utopia into a grueling dictatorship.

    That’s not really a good gamble

    • CazzoneArrapante@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      Italiano
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      8 hours ago

      If we want to get out from the late capitalist dystopia, repression against reactionary forces is the only way.

      • Soleos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        And then what? Yes, identifying and resisting an oppressive power structure is all well and good, but any revolution has to grapple with the fact that you will still have a massive population with cultural and ideological structures that can only conceive of the world in terms of the old system. Congratulations, you’ve toppled the government and now you have the power to implement a new system. What will you do with that power? Will you implement yet another system in which there is a powerful in-group that the law protects but does not bind and a disempowered out-group that the law binds but does not protect?

        • CazzoneArrapante@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          Italiano
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          you will still have a massive population with cultural and ideological structures that can only conceive of the world in terms of the old system

          We force them in the new system

          Will you implement yet another system in which there is a powerful in-group that the law protects but does not bind and a disempowered out-group that the law binds but does not protect?

          No, the new system would be “right-wingers and rich lobbyists fuck off while normal people thrive and late stage capitalist dystopia is finally unwinded, and whoever opposes it gets rekt”

          • Soleos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Okay, but you haven’t really answered the question of “what’s the new system”. You don’t have to solve all the problems of creating a new society, but you should have a general idea. “Not the old system and not the past people” is not an actual system. “Normal people thrive” is not an actual system.

            For example, monarchy would be a system where “capitalist dystopia is finally unwinded and whoever opposes it gets rekt,” but somehow I don’t think that’s what you want.

            You have to make an actual positive claim about what you envision, about your ideology, values, ethics, etc.

            • CazzoneArrapante@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              Italiano
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 hours ago

              A system that doesn’t fuck up the environment and creates people as wealthy as entire states should be enough.

              • Soleos@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 hours ago

                “not fucking up the environment” and “not creating wealthy elites” are descriptions of outcomes, not descriptions of political/economic systems like democracy, capitalism, monarchy, or Marxism.

                So given that you want to achieve these outcomes, what political/economic system do you think would better help us achieve them? What system of governing people and economic product do you think would help us better preserve the environment and avoid wealthy elites?

                For example, Marxism suggests a transitional phase of “dictatorship of the proletariat” that might align with things you’ve said. However it is exactly that, transitional. Historical examples of this we’ve seen such as Cuba, Vietnam, and China have transitioned to some form of market economics and with that, re-emergence of wealthy elites.