sc94597 said:
When you say you are "anti-power" you mean you are "anti-power differences" right? That'd mean you believe that private property is wrong in the instances in which it gives people extra power over others, and the state is wrong in instances in which it gives people extra power over others. Let's call one (property) economic power, and the other (state influence) political power. In that case each corner represents a different thing. In the left-most corner you have extreme differences in political power (theoretically), but not economic power. In the right-most vertex you have extreme differences in both economic and political power. In the top vertex you have differences in economic power, but there exists no political power. Now of course this gets confusing because all economic power is converted into political power in the case of "communism" and still exists, and all political power is converted into economic power in the case of "anarcho-capitalism." Anyway, basically from all of that, I think you'd fit right in the middle of the line between Anarcho Capitalism and Communism. That would be right where the "D" for Democracies is. |
Yeah that's about right. But all the other people in the centre/"mainstream" triangle share an acceptance of the establishment and having to compromise to get things done. I would be unable to compromise on what I believe is right.
Democracy ought to provide the "checks and balances" the textbooks say it does. But the actual result is gridlock like America (no necessary changes can be passed) or bureaucracy like Britain (the changes that are passed don't affect what actually happens on the ground)
I know what outcomes I want but I don't know which system to support to produce them.
