So you believe that there’s something like a group of people that will always be striving to be these capitalist overlords and that there’s no one in the rest of the population that would display that corrupt desire for power? Either this stinks of eugenics or you’re simply naive.
Firstly what does it help us killing that group, when the system doesn’t change? Secondly if both change, the system needs to be so that people striving to corrupt power will not be able to achieve that power. I’ve yet to see a system that managed that.
The soviet union for one certainly didn’t. In fact that is a playbook example of how not to do it, right besides the first french revolution.
If you believe that by killing the “corrupt overlords” you won’t be getting any more corrupt people striving for power, we’re once again at the point is this eugenics or are you naive.
If you think there hasn’t been an example of an alternative system of putting people in charge of a government, then you’re simply ignorant. Here’s one example for you to chew on:
The driving force of change in Cuba’s system are local organizations. There’s the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution, which operate on a neighborhood level, major workplaces and townships also form coherent political blocs, and the people who arise as leaders of the system are just community and workplace leaders who were elected into the system. There are no political parties, no big donors, and no entrenched power structure that vets candidates - its the most a government has ever been made up of regular people, and it’s communists who set it up.
So you believe that there’s something like a group of people that will always be striving to be these capitalist overlords and that there’s no one in the rest of the population that would display that corrupt desire for power? Either this stinks of eugenics or you’re simply naive. Firstly what does it help us killing that group, when the system doesn’t change? Secondly if both change, the system needs to be so that people striving to corrupt power will not be able to achieve that power. I’ve yet to see a system that managed that. The soviet union for one certainly didn’t. In fact that is a playbook example of how not to do it, right besides the first french revolution. If you believe that by killing the “corrupt overlords” you won’t be getting any more corrupt people striving for power, we’re once again at the point is this eugenics or are you naive.
If you think there hasn’t been an example of an alternative system of putting people in charge of a government, then you’re simply ignorant. Here’s one example for you to chew on:
The driving force of change in Cuba’s system are local organizations. There’s the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution, which operate on a neighborhood level, major workplaces and townships also form coherent political blocs, and the people who arise as leaders of the system are just community and workplace leaders who were elected into the system. There are no political parties, no big donors, and no entrenched power structure that vets candidates - its the most a government has ever been made up of regular people, and it’s communists who set it up.
Yes and that state only still exists because the lend-lease their doctors to the entire world and make the high-priced rum and cigars.