1696. Socialism and alternatives

My reading of history suggests that political systems with a single center are more authoritarian. As feudalism broke up europe went from feudal estates plus small towns to central state governments plus privatized businesses. The tensions betwen government and private allowed for a certain incommensurability that created interstices where artistic and social freedom could thrive. Multiple lines of alignment give rise to vitality that monochromatic societies can not. In china it was the villages vs. the emperor, “the people are in the mountains and the emperor is far away.’

Hence socialism is oppressive. But i am rethinking all of this. The city states of Italy might have been more fun. The problem with progressive want to come up with a single system that avoids conflict. But conflict well managed might be the more creative part of society.

The core issue is that our governance is not equal to our problems. Following my style, if i were president i would form high visibility citizen committees on each major problem, call witnesses, and have joint meetings. All public. The president would need to be active in the process.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s