4 ms·

These systems (most explicitly Rojava) are similar to Murray Bookchin's [0] ideas on libertarian municipalism. Basically, control over economy and environment i

by cultus 7y ago

These systems (most explicitly Rojava) are similar to Murray Bookchin's [0] ideas on libertarian municipalism. Basically, control over economy and environment is mostly devolved to the local level, with citizen's assembly and that sort of thing. It does seem to work well in practice, which is really encouraging. It's obvious now that we need a fundamental reorganization of our political economy for both material well-being and the climate. Something along these lines would probably be the best. The future will hopefully be much, much, more local in physical production and distribution. In such a scenario it would only make sense to keep power democratic and on the local level. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Bookchin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Bookchin

hippich 7y ago
I see a lot of parallels between political organizations, organisms, computer systems, etc. A larger system with vertical integration is more efficient at producing the result. In our life it manifests itself in affordable mobile phones, being able to launch a satellite, small amount of time necessary to understand contractual expectations, etc. But the larger the system - higher are the stakes if something goes wrong - eg. economy in 2000 -> 2008 -> 2020. In nature usually there are external factors that seem to do well at keeping systems from growing too much. I wonder what could be an equivalent in the political environment (without Darwinism and constant death of many to find the fittest ones).
- cultus 7y ago
  There still needs to be large-scale integration for things like complicated industrial production. Also, communication technology will only get better, so long-distance virtual collaboration should actually get easier. However, most things people need can be produced on a local scale. Large-scale organization can and does happen from the bottom. However, I feel like the future that is necessary for us to adopt just involves much less physical production and movement on a global scale. To a very large extent, some things we take for granted probably just aren't workable long-term, either from an environmental or human risk perspective. Constant travel, cheap flights, ordering googaws from Amazon, etc. Most things people need can be produced locally or mostly locally. Housing, food, furniture, boots, clothes, etc can all be produced to very high quality without using inputs from other continents. Sure, it involves more human labor in comparison to capital, but it is far cheaper once externalities are factored in. Besides, a huge proportion of our population does jobs which are literally useless. Redirecting that labor towards productive and more fulfilling ends would be great.
- sudoaza 6y ago
  I'd say organisms are not so much vertical organized but homeostatic, the likes of cybernetic control of old cyberneticians. Like the brain doesn't say each cell what to do, cells share the environment, each signals their state, needs and reach to their local environment. In that sense you would share information (on production, on the state of the environment, on needs) and each local community would react in accord to move that shared environment towards homeostasis. But even organisms aren't perfect, think of your body, when you consume great amounts of carbs your body secrets insulin in a negative feedback and actually overshoots sending glucose levels bellow optimal which eventually fixes itself after several cicles of self correction.
int_19h 6y ago
It's part borrowing, part convergent evolution - Ocalan was moving slowly in a similar direction for a while before discovering Bookchin, but when he did, it seems to have accelerated that process substantially. http://new-compass.net/articles/bookchin-%C3%B6calan-and-dialectics-democracy http://new-compass.net/articles/bookchin-%C3%B6calan-and-dia... And yes, I find it very encouraging that in places where the system is being experimented with, it's proving to be fairly stable, neither breaking up nor sliding into totalitarianism. Well, Rojava is not particularly stable - but that's mostly about Turkey, not about their internal politics.
- cultus 6y ago
  Yeah, it seems like the direct-democracy aspect is pretty essential to avoiding totalitarianism. More local control means popular will is laundered through less levels of representation. Rojava is fairly stable for its situation, but I actually find it fairly encouraging that they have been able to punch above their weight in self defense, even if they aren't a match for neighboring nation-states.

by cultus 7y ago

hippich 7y ago

I see a lot of parallels between political organizations, organisms, computer systems, etc. A larger system with vertical integration is more efficient at producing the result. In our life it manifests itself in affordable mobile phones, being able to launch a satellite, small amount of time necessary to understand contractual expectations, etc. But the larger the system - higher are the stakes if something goes wrong - eg. economy in 2000 -> 2008 -> 2020. In nature usually there are external factors that seem to do well at keeping systems from growing too much. I wonder what could be an equivalent in the political environment (without Darwinism and constant death of many to find the fittest ones).

cultus 7y ago
There still needs to be large-scale integration for things like complicated industrial production. Also, communication technology will only get better, so long-distance virtual collaboration should actually get easier. However, most things people need can be produced on a local scale. Large-scale organization can and does happen from the bottom. However, I feel like the future that is necessary for us to adopt just involves much less physical production and movement on a global scale. To a very large extent, some things we take for granted probably just aren't workable long-term, either from an environmental or human risk perspective. Constant travel, cheap flights, ordering googaws from Amazon, etc. Most things people need can be produced locally or mostly locally. Housing, food, furniture, boots, clothes, etc can all be produced to very high quality without using inputs from other continents. Sure, it involves more human labor in comparison to capital, but it is far cheaper once externalities are factored in. Besides, a huge proportion of our population does jobs which are literally useless. Redirecting that labor towards productive and more fulfilling ends would be great.
sudoaza 6y ago
I'd say organisms are not so much vertical organized but homeostatic, the likes of cybernetic control of old cyberneticians. Like the brain doesn't say each cell what to do, cells share the environment, each signals their state, needs and reach to their local environment. In that sense you would share information (on production, on the state of the environment, on needs) and each local community would react in accord to move that shared environment towards homeostasis. But even organisms aren't perfect, think of your body, when you consume great amounts of carbs your body secrets insulin in a negative feedback and actually overshoots sending glucose levels bellow optimal which eventually fixes itself after several cicles of self correction.

int_19h 6y ago

It's part borrowing, part convergent evolution - Ocalan was moving slowly in a similar direction for a while before discovering Bookchin, but when he did, it seems to have accelerated that process substantially. http://new-compass.net/articles/bookchin-%C3%B6calan-and-dialectics-democracy http://new-compass.net/articles/bookchin-%C3%B6calan-and-dia... And yes, I find it very encouraging that in places where the system is being experimented with, it's proving to be fairly stable, neither breaking up nor sliding into totalitarianism. Well, Rojava is not particularly stable - but that's mostly about Turkey, not about their internal politics.

cultus 6y ago
Yeah, it seems like the direct-democracy aspect is pretty essential to avoiding totalitarianism. More local control means popular will is laundered through less levels of representation. Rojava is fairly stable for its situation, but I actually find it fairly encouraging that they have been able to punch above their weight in self defense, even if they aren't a match for neighboring nation-states.