collapse of the old society

1105 readers

3 users here now

to discuss news and stuff of the old world dying

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

ex_06@slrpnk.net

Midnight@slrpnk.net

The Plot Against America (www.notesfromthecircus.com)

submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/collapse@slrpnk.net

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

And yet, the most terrifying part? Donald Trump, the supposed strongman at the heart of it all, is oblivious. He has no grand ideological project beyond his own power. He does not understand the system being built around him, nor the fact that his own presidency is merely a vehicle for forces that see him as a useful, temporary battering ram against democracy.

But those around him? They understand perfectly.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Dogyote@slrpnk.net 7 points 2 days ago (4 children)

I feel like few people would actually consent to this new system if they knew what it was and how it worked. So how do these guys plan on forcing their post-democratic system on us?

[–] qprimed@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

I dont think consent applies when every lever of power is controlled by the "grab em by the pussy" and "if youre rich, they let you do it" party.

just before musk shot out the seig heil heard around the world, he was effusive about the importance of this election - precisely because this is an absolutely perfect storm of forces against democracy and for technocratic autocracy.

as for enforcing the new status quo... I see no future that does not involve state violence.

[–] Cygnean@slrpnk.net 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is not a technocracy: it's not about expertise in a given area that decides leadership, but about plutocratic autocracy. I wouldn't say 'the rich' are naturally the experts.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah if you take the concept at face value it doesn't sound like the worst idea.

It would need a lot of guardrails but it's at least better than monarchy. I'd argue it would obviously devolve into a plutocracy basically immediately but that's better than right from the start I guess.

[–] Cygnean@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 day ago

I agree with you in that technocracy has a lot of potential and definitely sounds appealing, but I think it'd almost have to be socialist - both to atleast somewhat prevent the plutocratic devolution you speak of, as well as halting anti-intellectualism ('you don't need an education') and post-truth (like you see with American social media now).

Then again, not having a free market would also require new guardrails (how do you ensure proper distribution beyond the formal mathematics?), which makes it more complicated.

Always better than a monarchy though.

load more comments (1 replies)