Jump to content

Alternative System


Recommended Posts

So as not to derail the Labour/JC thread further....

Can any advocate of a new system give a brief outline of how it would work? Just a basic idea will do.

Also, what do I do if I disagree strongly with your system and want to maintain things as they are?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, Johnoco said:

Also, what do I do if I disagree strongly with your system and want to maintain things as they are?

If the system were to change, presumably this would be the "will of the people" and have to be respected at all costs and no matter how stupid it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, shrek said:

If the system were to change, presumably this would be the "will of the people" and have to be respected at all costs and no matter how stupid it was.

But if that's the case, why are people trying to change the current one? More people are happy with the current system than want to change it, otherwise it would have changed many years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Johnoco said:

But if that's the case, why are people trying to change the current one? More people are happy with the current system than want to change it, otherwise it would have changed many years ago.

If it were to change, I presume it would be because a democratic process had been followed making it the will of the people, if it stays the same it will also because of the will of the people, isn't this how these things work no matter how stupid the will of the people is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Farmduck said:

System for what? (I'm not going to read through a bitter 40-page thread about something I don't care about just to find out some tangential issue.)

The system. How we live our lives. Work, health, education, leisure etc.

How would the people who want to change it, organise say, taxes, bin collections, working hours, conditions etc etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, shrek said:

If it were to change, I presume it would be because a democratic process had been followed making it the will of the people, if it stays the same it will also because of the will of the people, isn't this how these things work no matter how stupid the will of the people is?

I don't recall any revolutions (ie Russia) arising through the ballot box though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Tongs ya bas said:

System's good from where I'm sat.

Up at seven, make the tea, take dogs out down the woods.

Back for breakfast, but of trl. 

Go for papers, read papers

Rest of day is up for grabs. owt could happen. 

 

So you're happy with the capitalist system? Ok 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Johnoco said:

So you're happy with the capitalist system? Ok 

I'm happy with my life. 

I've earned what I've got

I'm surrounded with fantastic people

I have health issues which I live with.

I'm not sure what the system that gets my day under way has anything to do with the capitalist system. You didn't mention the capitalist system in your introduction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Tongs ya bas said:

I'm happy with my life. 

I've earned what I've got

I'm surrounded with fantastic people

I have health issues which I live with.

I'm not sure what the system that gets my day under way has anything to do with the capitalist system. You didn't mention the capitalist system in your introduction.

Given that I  specifically pointed out that it was a new thread following on from the Labour Party/JC one so as not to divert it, what did you think I was talking about? If I just wanted to know how happy you were personally and what time you go for a walk, I'd have called it 'how's your life and what's your daily routine'. Wouldn't I?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

Given that I  specifically pointed out that it was a new thread following on from the Labour Party/JC one so as not to divert it, what did you think I was talking about? If I just wanted to know how happy you were personally and what time you go for a walk, I'd have called it 'how's your life and what's your daily routine'. Wouldn't I?

You asked people to advocate a new system. Your reference to corbyn etc al was vague.

I told you I was happy with my system. Sometimes to be honest I Chuck that system out of the window: might go to waitrose for breakfast, or go out for the day that kind of thing.

One would have thought it clear that those on here interested in politics have made the system they favour known, many times, and in many, but not all uses eloquently and knowledgeably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Johnoco said:

But if that's the case, why are people trying to change the current one? More people are happy with the current system than want to change it, otherwise it would have changed many years ago.

Because most people think something, it doesn't make them right.

This is complicated further by the fact that people's  ideas of what is right vary massively.

People who strive for change in whatever way do so because they want their beliefs, their idea of what is 'right' to prevail.

There are many ways of doing this, all legitimate and all within the current legal system in the UK. Phil alluded to this and was gently mocked. I will outline these ways if you wish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Tongs ya bas said:

You asked people to advocate a new system. Your reference to corbyn etc al was vague.

I told you I was happy with my system. Sometimes to be honest I Chuck that system out of the window: might go to waitrose for breakfast, or go out for the day that kind of thing.

One would have thought it clear that those on here interested in politics have made the system they favour known, many times, and in many, but not all uses eloquently and knowledgeably.

If you don't want to answer the question, don't. No need for such obtuse warbling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enough!  It’s a valid thread created to stop another going off track. Play nicely or go elsewhere to play.

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Johnoco said:

So as not to derail the Labour/JC thread further....

Can any advocate of a new system give a brief outline of how it would work? Just a basic idea will do.

Also, what do I do if I disagree strongly with your system and want to maintain things as they are?

Johnoco has good reason to start this thread.  Where the topic came up was when he was debating with another poster who hed a far left view point.  

John O'co is far more conservative than me.  I spent the weekends of the last couple of years on the street working with a Marxist organisation in urban California.  I liked a few of John O'Co's posts.  John Drake who is a Labour activist also sympathized.  

We were arguing with Phil, who to his great credit appears dedicated.  And far more politically pure than either John Drake or myself.  I think society will progress once the likes of me are dead.  

 

"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tongs ya bas said:

System's good from where I'm sat.

Up at seven, make the tea, take dogs out down the woods.

Back for breakfast, bit of trl. 

Go for papers, read papers

Rest of day is up for grabs. owt could happen. 

 

That really is a beautiful post.

"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I had a magic wand to change the UK I’d probably look to change the system to some sort of cooperative system.  You get out based on what you put in but you have no greater share than anyone else.  I’d have a universal income meaning those who didn’t want to work didn’t have to but they’d get not much above a decent level of subsistence.  Retirement would be at any age and you get your share immediately based on what you had put in.

One big change I'd make would be a fundamental recognition that management is a skill like any other and doesn’t deserve more money simply because you’re in charge. That would encourage people to gravitate to what they’re best at rather than reward based on the belief managers should get more.

All services would be free for need. Power, water, health all nationalised and free.

Politicians would hand ownership of their assets to the state on gaining power and returned to them on leaving. If the nation gets better with higher standards of living for all then they get a bonus based on that.  War can’t be started without the politicians taking basic front line infantry roles at a 50% lottery, half get drafted half stay to manage the country. 

Police have unchanged powers but must wear mandatory cameras while on duty with the feeds publicly available to anyone unless a defendant has an independent lawyer present.

Education is free for all to degree level with grants paid for degrees resulting in professional roles that actually require a degree and also are classed as socially essential.

State service would be mandatory for two years for everyone.  You can choose military or state options for all the esssential work that no-one wants to do. If you’re too ill to do manual labour then another role will be found for you, no exceptions. A refusal would be treated as a criminal offence with a fixed four year prison sentence.

100% inheritance tax unless the recipient volunteers to do an extra year of state service for every national average wage year of money left to them.

I could go on but then it’s just a pipe dream. Too many people love the status quo for it to change without a massive upheaval.

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The old socialist slogan "from each according to his abilities, to each his needs" has always been my starting point. I believe that heirarchies are almost always doomed to fail in the long run.

i believe in the revolutionary road to change because I don't think the current capitalist system can be reformed out of existence 

Historically revolutions are actually pretty peaceful with conflicts arising as the old order attempts to "drown the revolution in blood"

John has rightly punted out that there are shysters and even criminal elements in society, I'd reply with a question, does consciousness determine social being or does social being determine consciousness? 

"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ckn said:

If I had a magic wand to change the UK I’d probably look to change the system to some sort of cooperative system.  You get out based on what you put in but you have no greater share than anyone else.  I’d have a universal income meaning those who didn’t want to work didn’t have to but they’d get not much above a decent level of subsistence.  Retirement would be at any age and you get your share immediately based on what you had put in.

One big change I'd make would be a fundamental recognition that management is a skill like any other and doesn’t deserve more money simply because you’re in charge. That would encourage people to gravitate to what they’re best at rather than reward based on the belief managers should get more.

All services would be free for need. Power, water, health all nationalised and free.

Politicians would hand ownership of their assets to the state on gaining power and returned to them on leaving. If the nation gets better with higher standards of living for all then they get a bonus based on that.  War can’t be started without the politicians taking basic front line infantry roles at a 50% lottery, half get drafted half stay to manage the country. 

Police have unchanged powers but must wear mandatory cameras while on duty with the feeds publicly available to anyone unless a defendant has an independent lawyer present.

Education is free for all to degree level with grants paid for degrees resulting in professional roles that actually require a degree and also are classed as socially essential.

State service would be mandatory for two years for everyone.  You can choose military or state options for all the esssential work that no-one wants to do. If you’re too ill to do manual labour then another role will be found for you, no exceptions. A refusal would be treated as a criminal offence with a fixed four year prison sentence.

100% inheritance tax unless the recipient volunteers to do an extra year of state service for every national average wage year of money left to them.

I could go on but then it’s just a pipe dream. Too many people love the status quo for it to change without a massive upheaval.

I am actually increasingly hopeful about the future.  We seem to be in a golden age.

The reasons in some sames are pessimistic.  Medical progress means lots of old people, which means society is calm.  Collected wealth and increasing prosperity mean powerful people have plenty to lose if things go wrong.

But, it could also be that just as we find things in science because they happen to be true, regardless of how upset people get about it.  Equally, we could be learning to live with each other better.

"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Phil said:

The old socialist slogan "from each according to his abilities, to each his needs" has always been my starting point. I believe that heirarchies are almost always doomed to fail in the long run.

i believe in the revolutionary road to change because I don't think the current capitalist system can be reformed out of existence 

Historically revolutions are actually pretty peaceful with conflicts arising as the old order attempts to "drown the revolution in blood"

John has rightly punted out that there are shysters and even criminal elements in society, I'd reply with a question, does consciousness determine social being or does social being determine consciousness? 

We also can't compare revolutions that happened in the past in backwards, semi feudal countries with weak national bourgeoisie's propped up by foreign capital (Russia, China, Cuba, Vietnam etc) with a potential revolution in an advanced capitalist economy. The need for a 'transitional period' with all that that entails would, perhaps, be less likely. 

The age old question....materialist analysis of history would argue consciousness determines social being. But as Marx said 'it is not enough for thought to strive for consciousness, consciousness itself must strive towards thought' 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...