@Wolf480pl Random stranger chiming in! Another problem with revolutions is that destabilising the current government via violence delegitimises not only the old govt, but also govt in general. People see one govt get torn down for being unpopular, and assume the new one can be removed just as quickly if they turn out to be unpopular too. Then you get coup after coup after coup. That said, I wouldn't say it's unhealthy for governments to live in a little fear of what the masses can do to them...
@pinksalt yeah, I also think that it's healthy for a government to be constantly afraid of a revolution, as long as the govt doesn't react by pushing more police and more restrictions onto the people.
But when people think that actually making the revolution happen will make things better... that'll lead to no good.
@Wolf480pl Yeah, on balance it's not exactly a stable system... but stability is often a terror-based regime. So, like, fuck the universe I guess.
The peaceful method of revolution is to starve corrupt governments of their revenue. Taxation is just a euphemism for extortion anyway. We have crowd-funding, so we don't need the protection racket anymore. For welfare, we can go back to mutual-aid societies like we started off with. Of course wresting control of the banking system is also key to making that effective, or else they'll just inflate the currency (which is a tax on people's savings).
It misses the fact that the examples it's using have been massively interfered with by the US and Russia. If you want a successful revolution, look at Cuba. Very little struggle, now it is thriving. 98.9% literacy, universal healthcare, no racial economic discrimination. Literally the best doctors in the world.
All that, *while being under US Trade Embargoes*, and with the CIA not only trying to assassinate the leader (over 600 times), but running disinformation campaigns.
@alexandria It also uses the French Revolution as an example, which I doubt was influenced by US or Russia...
Indeed, and the political climate has changed a lot since then.
Replying as a reminder to self to read this later
This was a really interesting application of systems theory. I agree that changing complex path-dependent systems is more complicated than “just go for it”. Having said that, we shouldn't throw our hands in the air either because of complexity. Maybe stepwise evolution in the preferred direction is the way to go. But how to implement this in politics with short election cycles? #politics #systems
Politics is not the only area which can push stepwise evolution. I think that if you successfully make steps in the right direction in the 3 other areas (economy, culture, technology), then the politics will be forced to follow up, sooner or later.
IMO a short election cycle is not a problem. It would be if you wanted to oversee the stepwise change by winning the election. But for most of us, the assumption is we'll never win.
What we can do, is to pressure/convince every new govt to make a step in the direction we want.
Good point that politics is not the only arena. About election cycles, I was thinking of long-term transformation projects that could get started and then abandoned by the next government (think US). But maybe grandiose projects sort of go against the evolutionary change idea anyway.
We are a cute and loving international community Ｏ(≧▽≦)Ｏ !