lugal

joined 2 years ago
[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 8 months ago

I mean it's so wild, no one would make it up

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 months ago

"Why did you apply here and not at the other company?"
"I applied there too and the interview is tomorrow."

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 171 points 9 months ago (2 children)
[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

So the bolshevik state bureaucracy wasn't a new ruling class giving themselves privileges others didn't have?

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 9 months ago

Not exactly. The lowest level of councils is free for everyone to attend to. These neighborhood councils send delegates to the city level and so on. These delegates are revocable so when they don't do what the basis wants, they are gone. Also on each level, each group can opt out if they want. And decisions are made on the lowest level possible so much more voluntary and less central than Canada

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

aside from the decentralization of power?

That's the whole point. If your state concept is broad enough to entail any organization of a certain size, be my gast in a council republic

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

So we have a factory council open to all workers in the factory to make decisions and send revocable delegates to the city council where they talk to the delegates of farmer councils, consumer councils, .... If the factory council makes unfair decisions (and I assume you mean all the workers in the factory belong to the petite bourgeois since they all can attend the council), the consumer council can take collective action to counter it.

So who is the ruling class? Certainly not the bureaucracy as in liberal and bolshevik states since it doesn't exist here. Or is it the city council? They are revocable, not elected for a given period. Like the soviets before the Bolsheviks ruined everything.

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 9 months ago (10 children)

With a world wide net of councils, all connected but not centralized

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com -5 points 9 months ago (27 children)

That's state socialism, a specific kind of socialism that wants to keep the state apparatus, not realizing that it will always (re)create a ruling class. Different from Libertarian Socialism which unironically want a stateless society, not as a never to reach end goal.

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 9 months ago (38 children)

Wait, isn't socialism all about class solidarity? "Working together regardless of class to fight a common enemy" sounds more like nationalism where at the end the upper class profits most. Unless we are talking about a classless society but that's not "regardless of class" but "with no class distinction" which sounds very similar when I think about it.

view more: ‹ prev next ›