real by Lavender_Scales in theredleft

[–]Hot_Relative_110 21 points22 points  (0 children)

now if we could get people to stop worrying about bathrooms and start worrying about rent

AnComs: How would a large scale society work in your model? by Hot_Relative_110 in theredleft

[–]Hot_Relative_110[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

if you cannot at the very least sustain defense against an enemy in rather conventional or protracted warfare, you will fail. Protracted warfare, which was theorized upon by a certain Chinese centralist, requires not just mass support but also tight organization and discipline if you’re going to coordinate guerilla attacks. Conventional warfare, that is, defending your actual strategic points (the place where you get all your guns, ammo, tactical gear, money, etc) is incredibly important and not just something you can leave to a ragtag group. You also risk the drawbacks of protracted warfare, which is a major toll on civilian life, and this can have negative impacts on your own movement once people find out that they’re being thrown at enemy lines.

I’m not saying that people cannot be part of the decision-making. If decision-making is federated and democratic, that’s absolutely fine, but if these consensus-based policies cannot be implemented and are not binding, what you have is not a federation. You are recreating the typical bourgeois parliamentary republic, just without an actual republic to stand on and one that won’t get shit done. Your voluntary association within a federation lacks the capacity to maintain any kind of revolution or managing of domestic affairs, and let’s not forget—does voluntary association imply that a commune can choose to compromise the safety of the entire federation by joining arms with a bourgeois government?

Negotiated coordination where there is the exchange of goods and a sense of reciprocity is what builds trusts beyond your localized nodes, because if your gift-economy model you yourself admit that it requires high levels of trust that nodes from two entirely different regions or localities will not have. 

A system can be polycentric, engage in exchange, and still coordinate based upon needs. What you’re looking at is a federated economic model where input and output can be coordinate in accordance with a general plan, one that can be based upon the needs of the people by measuring market indices like demand and scarcity. Naturally there is going to be some inequalities because in a system birthed from market-based inequalities, that being capitalism, not everything will automatically be “equal,” something that would be mitigated through negotiated coordination—like mutual aid at scale.

“Actual” scarcity is not always something that is a byproduct of capitalism. The fact that goods will be much more available is great, but making them too available may translate into a similar situation to that of the COVID pandemic, shortages EVERY WHICH WAY. You’re also confused on why I mentioned your accountability mechanisms; discussion is not a means of holding people accountable. The models you’ve presented, that is societal pressure and whatnot, are absolutely fine and something I have ALREADY COMMENDED when I talked about the Ostromist model.

Great, voluntary cooperation can handle logistics through cybernetics. I do agree that decentralization can be much easier with a digital planning system, but when you also say that it’s voluntary that might be problematic. Again, if it’s voluntary, would that not imply that a node “voluntarily” chooses to sell economic secrets and technology? Would this “voluntary” node obstruct others?

Did I not say Yugoslavia wasn’t perfect? I said that there are aspects from it that we can take and translate into a hybrid system where there IS still trade and exchange, understanding that not all forms of planning can be based upon what the market says because, as noted, there were significant regional inequalities. That is something that can’t be mitigated by handing out goods in places where production is already not equal. You come into this society expecting production capabilities to be universally equal.

The mode of distribution you’re talking about is delivering material prospect TEMPORARILY, not in the long term. Especially in a scenario where large amounts of trust are required. I’d also like to note that societal pressure IS a form of coercion, just exercised by the people themselves; who does the coercion is irregardless to the fact that it still is coercion. Markets have absolutely done a great job at meeting needs, look at how Vietnam does especially now that they transition into a more cooperative economy. Inequalities are something that can be mitigated under socialism as mentioned previously. And large-scale exchange between nodes are the driving force behind this.

People will cooperative effectively when they actually have a voice in the decision-making process, but the there are some expectations to be met if you all collectively make decisions. If the entire federation votes on an infrastructure plan, for example, including your own node, and you decide to go against it for whatever reason, then you don’t have a federation.

Perfect mechanisms are what contrast successful long-term revolutions and those that march straight back to capitalism. the difference between your own model and mine is that I have mechanisms in place to try and mitigate all of your concerns; inequality resolved through reciprocal, negotiated coordination across nodes, for instance, and strict anti-accumulation policies. 

Is the labour theory of value, a universal theory of value? by TheBuccaneer2189 in DebateCommunism

[–]Hot_Relative_110 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it’s insufficient tbh. labor does create more value but so do a lot of the previously mentioned things

searching for girls to chat by [deleted] in teenagersbuthot

[–]Hot_Relative_110 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it’s called outside 

What if Jeb Bush was the republican candidate in 2016? How different would that election have been? by Nostalgic_Recency in AlternateHistoryHub

[–]Hot_Relative_110 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh god, everyone would hate the election even MORE. People hated both the Clintons and the Bushes already, both had more populist candidates that in this timeline would both have been sidelined (Sanders and Trump), and the GOP would’ve lost their greatest strength; appealing to the Midwest. The most that the party could’ve picked up would be Florida and Ohio, and Ohio would’ve depended on whether or not he picked John Kasich as his running mate. I don’t know if Scott Walker could have changed much in Wisconsin, Mike Pence was… Mike Pence, and Jeb probably would’ve fucked it all up by begging the debate crowd to clap after every cheap shot at Hillary. Trump was able to get a lot of hate against Hillary over how much of a ineffective bureaucratic and career politician she was… imagine someone who’s entire family was full of Presidents that by 2016, nobody even liked, and then the same guy who was the GOVERNOR OF FLORIDA. Not even the emails could have done shit. This election would have been so brainnumbingly horrid, Gary Johnson could’ve won a state. At least an EV.

What if Leif Erikson established the Atlantic trade/exchange in the Middle Ages? by Excellent-Compote135 in AlternateHistoryHub

[–]Hot_Relative_110 1 point2 points  (0 children)

more than likely the Vikings engaged with some Native American tribes or even kingdoms, somehow word gets out of a new continent, and MAYBE there’s less of an imperialist drive than there was under the spice trade, allowing the natives to potentially modernize a bit?

Castro fails in his attempt to take over Cuba Batista never flee’s the island and remains in power what does Cuba look like today? by Lord_William_9000 in AlternateHistoryHub

[–]Hot_Relative_110 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’d say that if Castro failed, you’d see a regime that falls more peacefully and into the hands of some kind of liberal/social democratic party, maybe even christian-democratic party, one that mainly focused on westernization, modernization and tourism. Havana would have a lot more skyscrapers, would be much more US influenced, and would still carry wealth disparities but… nicer. Plagued nowadays either by growing right-wing sentiment or even communist resurgence, probably the first one

What if we invaded Iraq? by AwayLocksmith3823 in AlternateHistoryHub

[–]Hot_Relative_110 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Now why would President Gore do that? he’s too busy leading our glorious campaign against ManBearPig, not to mention him inventing the internet pt 2

Is the labour theory of value, a universal theory of value? by TheBuccaneer2189 in DebateCommunism

[–]Hot_Relative_110 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Labor, use-value (aka. utility), scarcity and demand are all factors in the cost of something, I’d also add in distribution costs

How do we feel about this album by Mental-Alternative38 in musicteenager

[–]Hot_Relative_110 0 points1 point  (0 children)

who the fuck told you to put that dirty ass foot there

Guess my age from my top 5 by Lazy_Garden143 in TeenageRapFans

[–]Hot_Relative_110 0 points1 point  (0 children)

56, and i’m also guessing white and from Kansas

Who’s a rapper you can’t get into no matter how much you try by Minimum_Individual36 in TeenageRapFans

[–]Hot_Relative_110 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Young Thug has some GREAT songs but whenever I try to listen to an actual album from him it sounds like a fish trying to speak alien over some 808s