Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Socialism is not about centralized authority. That is just how it ends up when you have oligarchs needing a better brand than naked kleptocracy.



It's basically about surrendering individual power/consent to collective decision making, isn't it?


That's actually called living in a civilization.


Strong disagree. Living in a civilization means you have agreed to peacefully coexist with other members, and resolve disputes via due process. From there, whether you can opt out of military service or health insurance varies quite a bit within civilizations. This is where the question of "within your civilization, how free are you?" (vs. how obligated) starts to become relevant.


I disagree.

Your statement is true only because in the present day socialist governments control most of the desirable space.

The Vikings in the middle age moved to Iceland exactly to avoid kings and lords (not that far from our democracy) and they built a decentralised society which lasted 300 years.

They had private courts and private law enforcement. Strategic decisions were happening at the local level with local leaders.

I believe a decentralised society is possible - but there is just no interest in doing so and dismantling the status quo.

First, you need money to get elected in a position where you can do that. Your sponsors will likely want something in return. If you throw away all the power after getting it and create a decentralised society, you won't be able to return any favour or reap any benefit.

You may just as well become the next corrupted leader and get rich from the politics scam.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: