• KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I mean, the law literally states that we aren’t required to house soliders in the time of war if we desire. It also asserts privacy and a certain level of personal freedom. I see no extent as to why this shouldn’t extend to multinational corpos or at the very least, be explicitly clear.

    Ultimately, i think we just need to get into government, and actually fucking do something about it.

    • melpomenesclevage
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      “The system is broken! We must appeal to the system for help!”

      That’s insane and absurd.

      The amount of effort required to make government do anything other than imperialism and genocide (and they will always half ass it) is always a substantial multiple of just doing it yourself. Stop begging, and letting their bullshit appropriate your desire for a better world.

        • melpomenesclevage
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          No that would still end up with a government. If I’m gonna risk my ass like that for something, its going to be something I actually want.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            i have a theory that anarchy always ends in some form of government. I suppose you could have an anarchic government. But i would much rather have a difference government, with the same principles to begin with tbh. Anarchy is more of a driving force to me than anything else.

            • melpomenesclevage
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Everything always ends in something else. If it didn’t, it wouldn’t be an ending, or would violate thermodynamics.

              The point is nobody being in charge, in shrinking authority while keeping coordination.

              • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                that’s an interesting place to use a thermodynamics jumpscare, but frankly i think we just need proper isolation from state and federal government, each has their own purpose. They should do specifically what is most productive for themselves and nothing more.

                But that’s just me being fed up with shit being entirely inconsistent from state to state for no fucking reason.

                • melpomenesclevage
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Not a jump scare; conservation. The warm fuzzy part?

                  Why do you want people in charge without coordination? That seems remarkably unpleasant.

                  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    it’s not zero coordination, it’s highly coordinated, on account of being incredibly strict by design. The federal government would oversee things that are logical to be controlled by the federal government. The general workings of tax law for example. While state would focus on it’s micro system in comparison to the fed, adjusting federal tax law to be applicable to the state level.

                    Etc… repeat ad nauseam, until government no longer shit.