[Last_Historian]

http://www.sublimeoblivion.com/2010/01/ ... communism/

The current capitalist-industrial System is incapable of surmounting the limits to growth because markets and technology are no deus ex machina, nor is it capable of preventing growth because that is the very basis of its existence.

As such, we need to transition to an entirely new way of thinking about politics, society, and the economy, something I have tentatively called Green Communism.

This is a system based on technocratic planning using the latest tools of operations research and networking; spiritual succor based on transcendental values of ecotechnic sustainability instead of materialist value of unlimited growth; and political control based on ubiquitous 2-way sousveillance to detect corruption and free-riding.

Discuss.

[Ludi]

I'm not in favor of any hierarchical system, so I reject your technocracy.

Sorry about that.

http://tobyspeople.com/anthropik/2005/1 ... index.html

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'I') think he is correct. I don't see why a 'technocracy' has to be bad. Little knowledge-hierarchies (like student/teacher) such as guilds and journeyman/apprentice systems are good things.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '
')And not all flat, consensus-based decision making systems are all that great. I know. I wasted years in one.

[Last_Historian]

1. It will not be overwhelmingly hierarchic. For instance, horizontal networks will play a large role, e.g. in the system of general sousveillance designed to suppress corruption and free-riding.

2. Unfortunately, once society acquires a certain level of size and technological development (like our own), it needs a certain level of socio-political complexity to sustain itself, and that in turn requires a certain level of hierarchy. You need people at the top to set certain limits and restrictions to drag the world back from overshoot.

Unless we return to primitivism or manage to achieve a technological singularity, I do not think hierarchy can be abolished without a large fall in carrying capacity.

[Ludi]

We have almost certainly exceeded carrying capacity. I don't think continuing a failing system is going to fix that.

In my opinion, civilization is ultimately doomed. It's a system with collapse built in, as far as I can tell.

[Jotapay]

Text deleted.

I haven't traveled this world and put myself through school to settle down with a decent job to have a sophomoric, purely-theoretical know-it-all to tell me what they think they know.
You also need to learn a little more about history and communism before you ever try and pass it off as a good thing again.

Sorry, what I meant to say is that I will politely **** any chicken-neck control-freak pencil-pusher thinks they can tell me that they know better and can tell me what to do under a non-constitutional force of law.

[Homesteader]

I agree with Ludi and Jotapay. Objectionable text deleted.-FL

[the48thronin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jotapay', '[')color=red]Text deleted.[/color]
I haven't traveled this world and put myself through school to settle down with a decent job to have a sophomoric, purely-theoretical know-it-all to tell me what they think they know.
You also need to learn a little more about history and communism before you ever try and pass it off as a good thing again.

[Tyler_JC]

There's a reason "communism" as the world experienced it, failed miserable.

It is impossible to select some subset of the population to rule over the rest with absolute control and expect that system to produce good outcomes indefinitely.

Pride, greed, arrogance, and other human frailties will eventually creep into the technocracy.

You might get a generation or two of great leaders (Augustus Caesar) but eventually the dictatorship of the "smartest" will become just another dictatorship (Caligula).

What's to stop the leaders of a "green communist" state from enjoying the good life at the expense of the peasants?

[eastbay]

Same can be said of capitalism Tyler. Really.

It needs expansion to live and it can't expand any longer meaning it will most likely wither.

[Tyler_JC]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eastbay', 'S')ame can be said of capitalism Tyler. Really. It needs expansion to live and it can't expand any longer meaning it will most likely wither.

[Narz]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'W')e have almost certainly exceeded carrying capacity. I don't think continuing a failing system is going to fix that.

[Last_Historian]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', 'W')hat's to stop the leaders of a "green communist" state from enjoying the good life at the expense of the peasants?

[lper100km]

When materials, food, and resources are abundant, it is easy to promote individualism and growth occurs naturally. There’s enough for all and no real competition for the basics. Any competition is among the people and companies selling goods and services. This will continue while resources can supply the demand.

Now, when the resources dry up relative to the demand, individualism is in for a hard knock. Unbridled individualism will inevitably result in anarchy, societal breakdown and complete lawlessness. The downslope of the resource curve will require an opposite social behaviour to take hold in order to manage an (hopefully) equitable resource distribution. Unquestionably society will evolve into, even demand, a controlled distribution system with rationing and perhaps martial law to ensure it works. North America has never, ever experienced the lean times on a national scale which make such controls acceptable, so will be ill prepared for the transition and the eventuality, and to their detriment will fight against it.

There’s no point in attaching labels to the structure. That’s simply seen as inflammatory especially when ‘communism’ is invoked. It doesn’t matter what it’s called, but the resources downslope will eventually be characterized by managed and controlled distribution systems and regimented societies, complete with graft and greed parasitic behaviour, worldwide, at least for the survivors.

Abundant energy has allowed the age old tribal and hierarchical structures to wither in favour of universal personal fulfillment. Look for that to reverse in a hurry when energy fails. Some parts of the world where energy is a luxury, have never lost those primitive social structures.

I don’t like any of it, but it seems to me that is what will happen in general terms.

[Cloud9]

Communism, another failed religion. How many unequal millions are going to have to die before your dystopia is seen by all for what it is, a failed social experiment that ends with the country being ruled by the secrete police turned mafia?

[SeaGypsy]

1st question: Who is 'We'?
Honestly, how much reading have you done? The "Green Left Coalition" has been operating for decades and has achieved a monthly 4 page newspaper delivered free to English speaking city streets around the world. (WhooHoo!)
Who is going to instigate this?
Wealth IS Power.
The Wealthy are very few and they have enormous amounts of Power.
The Poor are very many and have less Power than ever.
The Rich are not about to hand over sovereignty to the Commons.
The proposal here is at best wishfull thinking of what might come about AFTER the INEVITABLE COLLAPSE.
Otherwise it is just naive.

[Cloud9]

Not much on the Green Left, quite a bit on Communism.

[SeaGypsy]

Was referring to LH not you cloud9