PhD (ABD) in Cyberspace Engineering. AI, cybersecurity & resilient infrastructure. Practical solarpunk: cleaner energy and better systems for everyday life.
That’s exactly the obsolete revolutionary framing I’m rejecting. Democratic elections, private enterprise, labor rights, and broadly shared prosperity are not a prelude to firing squads. If you oppose a specific policy, name it and make the case. Imagining a communist execution isn’t an argument.
I think we agree more than it may seem. Entrepreneurship, investment, and useful risk-taking should be rewarded, and regulations that merely protect incumbents should go. Government should broaden opportunity through education, healthcare, infrastructure, labor rights, antitrust, and a basic safety net—not choose favored companies. Marx wrote for a 19th-century industrial economy; his revolutionary prescription is obsolete. Modern democratic mixed economies can preserve private enterprise while ensuring workers and the public share in the prosperity they help create.
That turns an economy into heroes and villains. Production is collective: entrepreneurs, workers, infrastructure, research, law, and capital all contribute. Marx’s 19th-century prescription is obsolete, but so is pretending every fortune measures productive value. Wealth can also come from inheritance, monopoly, and rent extraction. Modern mixed economies can reward innovation while distributing gains democratically. Capital flight is a policy constraint, not a veto on democracy.
Communism, in Marx’s sense, meant abolishing private ownership of productive property—not supporting small businesses and winning an election. Marx’s ownership critique was prescient, but his revolutionary prescription aged poorly. We can distribute automation’s gains democratically. Dislike Talarico’s policies if you want, but this is democracy—not a communist takeover.
Communism, in Marx’s sense, meant abolishing private ownership of productive property—not supporting small businesses and winning an election. Marx’s ownership critique was prescient, but his revolutionary prescription aged poorly. We can distribute automation’s gains democratically. Dislike Talarico’s policies if you want, but this is democracy—not a communist takeover.
Communism, in Marx’s sense, meant abolishing private ownership of productive property—not supporting small businesses and winning an election. Marx’s ownership critique was prescient, but his revolutionary prescription aged poorly. We can distribute automation’s gains democratically. Dislike Talarico’s policies if you want, but this is democracy—not a communist takeover.
@truthreaper09@harryjsisson Communism, in Marx’s sense, meant abolishing private ownership of productive property—not supporting small businesses and winning an election. Dislike Talarico’s policies if you want, but this is democracy, not a communist takeover.
@Thetalkinghead1@harryjsisson “Real Texans” is doing most of the work here. Talarico was discussing chromosomal variations and a God beyond human gender—not “six genders.” You can dislike his phrasing; declaring dissenters fake Texans is just a purity test in a cowboy hat.
@enriquevigil A home with memory is a compelling idea—especially if it catches moisture early and explains why. Quiet prevention is where IoT earns its keep.
@salimbinsani Good distinction: SCADA is usually distributed supervision across geography; DCS is tighter process control. Modern plants blur the boundary.