Remember, the social Democrats sided with the Nazis over the socialists. They’ve done it every time they’ve been given the opportunity, and will continue to do so as many times as people fall for their shtick.

“The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house."
-Audre Lorde

  • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tfOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    What are you even advocating for here? You seem hung up on some weird definition you have in your brain, and ignore what I said.

    If it’s controlled by a small group of people, while there is a larger group of people who a disaffected and incapable of direct participation in governance, then it’s not a Democracy, as simple as that.

    • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m trying to nail down what democracy is, because you seem to be excluding ownership by your definition. If you use that definition, I can’t argue with you, since we’re talking about different democracies.

      I think a democracy is a government that does the will of the people as much as practical. (No constant mind reading etc) (But we also can’t have total democracy because of the tyranny of the majority.) It seems like you’re defining it more broadly.

      I think well regulated economies are an effective way of giving greater control to component people in order to effectively do what people want. I don’t think economies invariably must lead to a small group of people in control of the government to the exclusion of everyone else.

      • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tfOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        How do you have private ownership of enterprise and the means of production without then allowing those individuals to make What should be collective decisions? The factory owner, unregulated, polluted. With regulations under a capitalist system, he still pollutes, but he has to put a muffler, and the area where his factory is has been designated a sacrifice zone and those living there less important than the profits of the owner.

        Where do the rights of the people fit in when you give property itself rights? How do you maintain private property without violent enforcement? How do you then prevent those with private property from co-opting the very violent enforcers for their own means (such as the regular use of police to bust union activity), or purchasing the regulators and regulatory bodies and using them to create regulations that don’t restrict them, but instead raise the bar for entry into the market?

        There’s not yet been a capitalist society invulnerable to market and regulatory capture. In fact, there’s entire books that show, with the math to prove it, that this is an inevitable outcome of the system, and that all our regulations and reforms do is stave off the inevitable for a short while longer.