5 ms·

> All taxation and voting should happen on the lowest level. While I too am tinkering with these ideas, the trouble with this is that we need massive infrastuc

by gkya 10y ago

> All taxation and voting should happen on the lowest level. While I too am tinkering with these ideas, the trouble with this is that we need massive infrastucture work even outside the context of totalitarian self-promotion; and this is not achievable with small-scale local governments. Nowadays nobody is self-sufficient, as even the most simple things we use require material and labour from all over the world [1] that needs to be excavated, processed, produced, moved, bought and sold. I think that if we were to limit all governments to city-state like beings, economical macro-structures that will be more powerful than those states would form in no time. Also, as today the term worker has so less to do with the worker of the past two centuries, most of the theories become more and more irrelevant. If we want a better today, we need newer theories. That's exactly what the totalitarians are doing, they're using new methods and theories of marketing to succeed their way to domination of economical systems. Many utopias are possible, but at the end of the day, if it's not utopia everywhere, it's utopia nowhere. A country cannot isolate itself from the outer world in their excess of happines because that last one depends on global welfare today. It's not the ages that you could stay safe when there's conflict thousands of kilometres away anymore. [1] a nice illustration of this is the famous I, pencil: http://www.econlib.org/library/Essays/rdPncl1.html http://www.econlib.org/library/Essays/rdPncl1.html

zanny 10y ago
Nothing stops city states from collaborating to build a highway between themselves, where the participants divest the costs amongt all participants (preferably in order of whom benefits the most). It is a negotiation. It is how underseas fiber cables are laid, how canals are navigated, how the seas and skies are shared.
cies 10y ago
> the trouble with this is that we need massive infrastucture work Sure. :) But there are two options. Small steps in the right direction (need a lot of work), or revolution (needs even more work). > I think that if we were to limit all governments to city-state like beings, economical macro-structures that will be more powerful than those states would form in no time. Ok. In some cases these structures maybe beneficient, even started on behalf of the small-scale super autonomous self-governments. If not those small-scale govts can just ban (or not give them money anymore) them; they are autonomous. > Also, as today the term worker has so less to do with the worker of the past two centuries True in the west. Workers here are now "priviledged workers", our economies in the west in need of cheap labor in other places. There the "worker" still exists in its classical form. Here we have a new form, but if you look closely you still see many. To me it is simple, I see capitalists (defined as never "have to" work to survive a fancy life time), and non-capitalists (used to have been referred to as "workers"). > Many utopias are possible, but at the end of the day, if it's not utopia everywhere, it's utopia nowhere. That raises the bar very high. I look more at it as a one village/neighbourhood at the time kind of thing. Do you know "I pencil" from Corbett? He's an agorist I believe, dunno. I'm more towards mutualism/anarchism/market-socialism; as I think private property should have limits (otherwise those ideologies are quite similar).

by gkya 10y ago

zanny 10y ago

Nothing stops city states from collaborating to build a highway between themselves, where the participants divest the costs amongt all participants (preferably in order of whom benefits the most). It is a negotiation. It is how underseas fiber cables are laid, how canals are navigated, how the seas and skies are shared.

cies 10y ago

> the trouble with this is that we need massive infrastucture work Sure. :) But there are two options. Small steps in the right direction (need a lot of work), or revolution (needs even more work). > I think that if we were to limit all governments to city-state like beings, economical macro-structures that will be more powerful than those states would form in no time. Ok. In some cases these structures maybe beneficient, even started on behalf of the small-scale super autonomous self-governments. If not those small-scale govts can just ban (or not give them money anymore) them; they are autonomous. > Also, as today the term worker has so less to do with the worker of the past two centuries True in the west. Workers here are now "priviledged workers", our economies in the west in need of cheap labor in other places. There the "worker" still exists in its classical form. Here we have a new form, but if you look closely you still see many. To me it is simple, I see capitalists (defined as never "have to" work to survive a fancy life time), and non-capitalists (used to have been referred to as "workers"). > Many utopias are possible, but at the end of the day, if it's not utopia everywhere, it's utopia nowhere. That raises the bar very high. I look more at it as a one village/neighbourhood at the time kind of thing. Do you know "I pencil" from Corbett? He's an agorist I believe, dunno. I'm more towards mutualism/anarchism/market-socialism; as I think private property should have limits (otherwise those ideologies are quite similar).