Some women I like to treat well. Some women I want to be treated badly by. Some women I want to just be friends. Some women I want to keep as far away from me as possible. This woman is the kind I want to grab by the neck, push against the wall, and just squeeze.
You understand the difference between a civil and common law system is an extremely niche issue that most people engaged in online politics don't really have an opinion on, right?
I called you a fascist accelerationist because you were praising the Trump victory for something that doesn't fucking matter. It's like if you said some deranged like "elephants are a cooler animal than donkeys."
Didn't he actually say this before? The stupid part, I mean.
How would different communes compete for scare resources? How would disputes be resolved?
The only straight answers I've ever received on the matter mostly ammount to wishful thinking.
A small community can definitely be communist, and it is possible to achieve inter-communal dependance with mutual trade relationships, but without a medium of exchange I suspect that it'd be far more difficult and other factors make the situation strike me as incredibly unstable, because the incentives to defect could easily outweigh those of cooperation.
The real answer is that I don't know, and we don't have enough data to say what would work.
A real example, as in something that existed IRL? I have none that I'm Aware of. The assertion was that the argument between capitalism and communism was one of centralization and decentralization. I was illustrating that that was simply not the case. I don't need a real example of either to do that, since we are only speaking about ideas and how they interact with each other.
There are accepted definitions of both that allow for either to be centralized or decentralized. Thus, the argument between which one is better cannot merely be an argument between centralization and decentralization.
-
Everyone you want to
-
If there's a legal obligation to inform someone where you are, everyone like that.
End of list.
It depends on how you define the word. If you define it as "whatever awful shite Stalin did" then there is none. If (like me) you use " classless, moneyless, stateless society" then I can hardly conceive of an example real or hypothetical that isn't decentralized.
I've literally talked to both those bastards this very week! š
It requires organized violence, which is easily facilitated by a centralized state, but I don't think the centralized state is necessary per-se.
I will definitely agree that it tends to centralize power over time, but I suspect this is true of all higherarchical systems of organization. Those with power will try to accumulate more.
What? Neither communism nor capitalism is inherently centralized. The USSR centralized everything, but they were definitionally not communist.
I'm told that this is a real picture.
"Every previous president would have ended it by now."
"Biden literally couldn't do worse."