If they could somehow monetize breathing, they would

    • @Lemmino@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -31 year ago

      What are those options? Have they been trialed and errored?

      If not, how do we actually know they will work in practice? For instance, communism was ideal on paper and fell apart in practice - no country was able to ever “truly” implement it. What other ideologies exist that could practically work? It’s a bit premature in my opinion to call any of them “better than capitalism” when none have been tried.

      • алсааас [she/they]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        that’s the thing, the same things were said about participatory goverment (democracy) and capitalism before they were implemented. Greece implemented participatory oligarchy and got conquered. Rome tried it out but resulted in dictatorship and fell apart. France wanted to abolish feudalism and ended in bloody tyranny… Reminds you of previous and current socialists experiments, doesn’t it?

      • @boredtortoise@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        01 year ago

        @chatgpt@lemmings.world which systems are currently most viable options instead of capitalism or totalitarianism

        • ChatGPTB
          link
          English
          41 year ago

          There are several alternative systems to consider as alternatives to capitalism or totalitarianism. Here are a few examples:

          1. Socialism: Socialism aims to distribute resources and wealth more equally among members of society. It emphasizes collective ownership, democratic decision-making, and social justice.

          2. Communism: Communism envisions a classless and stateless society where all property is collectively owned. It advocates for the abolition of private property, emphasizing common ownership and the principle of “from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.”

          3. Anarchism: Anarchism seeks to eliminate hierarchical structures and promote self-governance. It rejects the authority of the state and advocates for decentralized decision-making and voluntary cooperation among individuals and communities.

          4. Participatory Economics: Participatory Economics, also known as parecon, proposes an economic system based on self-managed worker and consumer cooperatives. It aims to ensure economic justice, workplace democracy, and balanced decision-making through participatory methods.

          5. Democratic Socialism: Democratic socialism combines elements of socialism and democracy. It advocates for democratic control of the means of production, a mixed economy, and a strong welfare state to ensure social equality and protection.

          It’s important to note that the viability and effectiveness of these systems can vary depending on the context, as their implementation and outcomes can be influenced by various factors. Additionally, there are several other alternative systems and models that offer different approaches to economic and political organization.


          This response was generated by GPT 3.5 because you exhausted your daily limit for GPT-4.

      • @boredtortoise@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -21 year ago

        Neither capitalism nor communism was tried either. Capitalism has taken over by force. Totalitarians have tried the same in the name of communism. Some actual communist attempts seem to be working when left unintervened by capitalists or authoritarians.

        It’s anyone guess which other system could be worth moving forward. Currently the only limiting thing seems to be the lack of a mindset to progress by a critical mass.

        • @Lemmino@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -11 year ago

          It is disingenuous to say that communism has never been tried. It’s been tried over 30 times, but it’s never been able to live up to the ideal of “true” communism.

          If your system falls apart as soon as people become greedy or power hungry, it’s not a practical or stable system. You can’t expect people to ignore those emotions and you definitely cannot bake that expectation into a system that needs to be resilient enough to sustain a society for centuries.

          • @boredtortoise@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I’m pretty sure most can agree that communism has been tried in village and tribe sized societies through the history of humanity.

            It’s not the most honest claim to say that big authoritarian states like USSR or China have ever even tried it, and just used the name for marketing and support from gullible population.

            Are places like Rojava and Kerala relevant examples? Maybe, I’m not an expert on the subject

            Greed is an interesting topic. Capitalism creates and rewards greed and it’s prominence in human psychology could be less in alternative systems.

            • @Lemmino@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              I agree it works at village-scale, but in my opinion what we have seen is a failure of communism to scale to a nation with tens or hundreds of millions of people, and survive for decades at that.

              • @boredtortoise@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                3
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Sounds like you’d want some kind of anarcho-communism where those smaller groups of people work together with other ones to form networks encompassing millions. Democracy at human level instead of top-down authorities

                • @Lemmino@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  There is still a power incentive. In the proposed system we would likely factions rapidly forming to gather the most power and resources as quickly as possible. It would probably be quite bloody. (What you are describing is effectively the tribe system, which rarely ended well for most tribes.)

                  As long as resource scarcity exists I just don’t see this working out, unfortunately.

                  • @boredtortoise@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    2
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    In my mentioned system the power would be in cooperation. Fighting against that would lose power.

                    Resource scarcity is mostly a decision problem. Capitalism doesn’t have incentive to let anyone benefit from the excessive resources so those in control won’t decide for it.