The difference between a Quadrillionare Musk and a powerful socialist government is the difference between a dictatorship and a democracy, simple as.
"Are those in charge held accountable to society at large?" Is precisely the thing being fought over.
The difference between that and government ownership is that there are elected officials who make decisions and appointments. Those elected officials are ultimately responsible to the people who elect them, rather than private citizens who do as they please with their property.
@Himothymarx@NKY_Leftist Do you think Elon would be the one personally doing everything? Lol. He'll be the boss. Just like there would be a boss in the government with the same people, doing the same thing. Except Elon is too busy building rockets and getting us to Mars to care about a food chain.
Wealth is a kind of power. More and more wealth, like more and more power, falling into one person's hands is a threat to everyone. A threat that expresses itself in poverty, in waste, in worse working conditions... 10,000 ways it effects each and every one of us.
The Texas GOP nominee for Railroad Commissioner is mostly campaigning on how he wants to deport law abiding Muslim American citizens.
For every ten stories about Platners dating life maybe we can get one on this Klansman?
Quite to the contrary, liberals absolutely love the ideals of this country and want it to live up to them. Are also unafraid to confront our complicated history. It's conservatives who want to completely rewrite history and remake the country into something its not. -OS
Think about all the column inches and headlines devoted to Graham Platner over the past week versus Ken Paxton and then tell me again we have a ‘liberal’ media.
I spoke yesterday in Paris about how socialist policy can enable us to overcome social deprivation and ecological crisis, by aligning investment and production with democratically determined objectives.
I noticed that some people assume socialism necessarily means 100% public ownership, but this is not the case. Yes, for many important reasons, we need public ownership of public services, utilities and the commanding heights, and yes we need a public finance system, industrial policy and credit guidance...
But there's no reason we cannot have private firms producing consumer goods like watches, beer, etc - the key is that they should be democratically owned and managed, by workers or communities empowered to determine the objectives of investment and production.
We know that when people have democratic control over production they are more likely to align it with social and ecological needs.
Socialism is ultimately about economic democracy: extending the principle of democracy into the realm of production. Cooperatives are an important step in this direction.
Global people have no obligation to be kind towards US occupation forces. But communists/left wing forces must have a plan to integrate them into their organizations.
The KPD failed and these men became blackshirts.
The Bolsheviks succeeded and created the Red Army.
@iniemohk My biggest argument for it over Alaska/Hawaii is probably strategic necessity for dominance in the Pacific. Britian was always a bit of a vanity project for the Romans, nice to have but not critical for any particular strategic objective.
@iniemohk In a hypothetical future, how militarized does the US border get? The area is arguably about as militarized as any other part of the Southwest from what I understand. It’s where Roswell is, significant airforce presence, Los Alamos is where research on Atomics happened etc.
@iniemohk The pull seems to be towards an island or at least a non-contiguous part of the US but remember the US is a major navel power (unlike Rome), so I think it makes more sense for it to be a geographically and culturally isolated part of its land boarders.
@iniemohk "In what way?" kind of question, but I'm going to say New Mexico for the following reasons: peripheral part of the empire, some aculturation but still significant indigenous cultural continuity, relatively inaccessible area that's easily lost in the shuffle.
vaguely recall seeing some university spending significantly more on union-busting, policing, etc... than it would have cost to meet the demands of organizing graduate workers because the issue is never the money; it's the power. they'll happily take this deal; AI won't organize.
I can say a lot of things (good and bad) about the Roman Empire, but one thing that’s pretty clear is that there was a decisions to focus on internal stability over expansion, and while we can’t know counter-factuals, the empire went on for like another 1200 years after that.
The mammoth went extinct.
The Roman Empire hit a maximum size, then gradually unraveled.
Steppe cultures continuously flowed out of the region into others, then got assimilated into farming societies.
Brittish Empire fell apart.
What's the point of this meme again?
Our point is that "if you build society on the assumption of infinite growth, it will eventually collapse, and sooner rather than later if you aren't careful."
Future generations might pick up the pieces and start over, but WE HAVE TO LIVE THROUGH THE COLLAPSE YOU IDIOTS.
@lyndonbajohnson I'd say, there’s an actual city inside Houston if you dig; there are definitely parts of Houston proper that are burbs in a trenchcoat.