Describe me your political utopia

[PassTheBeer]

Since I'm having a little trouble following up with the market/property/theories chit chat.. why not just describe your perfect world. :D
I think that way I will get a clearer picture of what you gentlemen are desiring

[Tablo]

Well, I don't think a perfect world or utopia is possible, but what I desire is Communism. This would be a stateless classless society based on a socialist gift economy. It would be, in my mind, made up of various directly democratic communes that elect instantly re-callable candidates for matters of economic management of the region. Obviously the economic planning is primarily a suggestion and each commune has all the right in the world to opt out. Now obviously there are various ways a communist society could be organized, but this is the way I think it would turn out. The main idea is every one is free and everything is run on democratic principles including general decision making, economic management, and operation within the workplace.

[Summerspeaker]

Ursula Le Guin's The Dispossessed and Shulamith Firestone's The Dialectic of Sex form the basis for my revolutionary dreams. In short, I want an automated economy that frees everyone from toil and provides abundance to all equally in conjunction with culture of universal love. The gender distinction and traditional family structure has got to go.

[The Count]

No one on Earth except for me.

[PoliticalNightmare]

Democratic organisations of free associations with the responsibility of organising the distribution of labour. Individuals may pass inbetween free associations freely. The state will not be utilised during the transition phrase to such an economy, rather worker's organisations will take over under present day capitalism.


No one on Earth except for me.

Filthy idealist! :D

[gorillafuck]

Very democratic and accountable government and an economy run bottom up by workers councils and collectives.

That's basically it.

[StalinFanboy]

I don't have a concrete vision of the future. I don't think it's entirely possible or beneficial to plan what the world will look like post-rev when all we've ever known is capitalism.

[PoliticalNightmare]

Very democratic and accountable government and an economy run by democratic workers councils and collectives.

That's basically it.

I want no part ;)

[syndicat]

I would think of the change that is needed in terms of the dissolution of the power of the dominating and exploiting classes, and of the various forms of oppression. As I see it, a necessary condition for this is the generalization of self-management through society, through workers self-management of production of goods and services, and social self-management by the masses over public affairs. the building blocks would be the direct face to face democracy of assemblies, in workplaces and neighborhoods.

these assemblies would also need to elect coordinating committees, made up of delegates who are one's neighbors or felllow workers.

Self-management is a part of positive liberty but so is access to the means to develop your potential. Workers won't be able to effectively self-manage production unless they can gain skills and knowledge to participate effectively in the decisiion-making. the idea here is to break down the old managerial bureaucracy by reorganizing the jobs so that all jobs involved doing some of the physical work but also some aspect of the skill and expertise and decision-making. there would need to be great changes in the educational system to further this aim. there the aim would be to provide equal access to the means of personal development from the earliest years (e.g. high quality free pre-schools) on.

there would be congresses of delegates elected both for industries and for regions such as a city or metropolitan area. delegates would be elected by the base assemblies, would have term limits, would have to report back to the assemblies that elect them, could be removed by the base assemblies, would continue to work at their regular job and only be remunerated for the delegate work at the same rate as their regular job. if the rank and file disagree with a decision of a delegate congress, there should be an easy way for a handful to petition to send the proposal back to the base assemblies for discussion and decision.

the means of production would be owned by the society, that is, worker organizations and individuals would not be at liberty to simply sell it off. workers would have a use right to their means of production, and would be allotted this on the basis of some system for ensuring social accountability, in terms of what is produced or social effects like pollution.

the old hierarchical armies and police would have to be replaced with a democratically structured militia directly accountable to the base assemblies, that is, the system of direct popular power.

with the dissolution of the old state bureaucratic and military/police apparatus, and the rebuilding of governance on the basis of direct and delegate democracy, we can say the governance system is no longer a state.

as the revolution is a common venture with shared risks among the working class who are the engine of it, remuneration for work should be equalized, that is, rate of pay per hour would be the same.

there are various forms of direct social provision that would need to be provided free in order to ensure equal access to the means to develop your potential and sustain your abilities....free education, free health care. communities and regions through their system of popular power could extend the system of social provision to whatever things they wish.

anyway, this is a brief list of some key features.

[gorillafuck]

I want no part ;)
If you oppose government then you oppose any form of democracy, because any form of organization (hence even the most direct democracy) is a form of government government.

[PoliticalNightmare]

If you oppose government then you oppose any form of democracy, because any form of organization (hence even the most direct democracy) is a form of government government.

Strictly speaking no. I would define government as a centralised institution with the intent of forcing all majorities and minorities alike to live by its "laws" regardless of their views on moral ethics. It also has the intention of maintaining the ownership over the state - that collection of armed forces and law courts - and, more importantly, preserving the status quo - the economic order of capitalism and the order of traditional elites. With direct democracy, minority groups who disagree with the laws of their free association may instead freely associate themselves with another commune. Voluntary links are made which may be broken freely between associations to keep peace (if ever there is a need) and to ensure trade/cooperation occurs between associtations.

[gorillafuck]

Voluntary methods of governance are still government.

Government means facilitation, running something. The modern manifestation of the state isn't the only thing that government can imply.

[Summerspeaker]

Any form of organization is a form of government? What? :confused: While you can plausibly argue that any anarchist attempt to abolish the government would create another one in its place, calling all organizations forms of government makes a mockery of the English language.

[PoliticalNightmare]

Voluntary methods of governance are still government.

Government means facilitation, running something. The modern manifestation of the state isn't the only thing that government can imply.

The only governance we need is self-governance. Otherwise, to govern something is to rule something and to have government is to have rule.

[syndicat]

It's hard to resolve this dispute because the word "government" is actually ambiguous. very often in ordinary parlance people use "government" as a way of referring to the state, the whole bureaucratic government apparatus.

direct popular power through assemblies and such can be the basis of social governance, control over the rules of a society, enforcement of those rules, and so on, in a classless society. it's inevitable that there will be some system of governance...or "government"...in this sense. The modern state is just one particular form of governance system, one that derives from the needs of a dominating, exploiting class.

complete rejection of majority decision-making, even in the direct democracy of assemblies, is a view only taken up by extreme individualists.

[gorillafuck]

Any form of organization is a form of government? What? :confused: While you can plausibly argue that any anarchist attempt to abolish the government would create another one in its place, calling all organizations forms of government makes a mockery of the English language.
No, saying that direct democracy is not a form of governance is a mockery of the English language.

And I meant that structure to run the economy and rules are a form of government, whether they are "voluntary" or not. Governance is government.

A commune that has peoples assemblies to decide on how to run affairs is governing itself. Therefore, it has government.

[Acostak3]

If you oppose government then you oppose any form of democracy, because any form of organization (hence even the most direct democracy) is a form of government government.Well going by that extremely broad definition he doesn't oppose government.

[Agnapostate]

A smoothly functioning free market that allocated according to supply and demand. Since utopia is utopia, after all, I stick with realism.

[Apoi_Viitor]

A world where everybody is happy.

[bailey_187]

The whole world is industrialised and has socialist relations of production. Everyone only has to work a few hours a week due to everybeing able to work (if they can). Massive abundance of all the good things in life.

[Widerstand]

Sex and trees and beer and LSD everywhere!

[PassTheBeer]

I can imagine a communistic world without any money in it.. but somehow I can't imagine a world with no government.. I'll have to dig thru more anarchist threads

[PoliticalNightmare]

I can imagine a communistic world without any money in it.. but somehow I can't imagine a world with no government.. I'll have to dig thru more anarchist threads

communism is stateless.

[PassTheBeer]

A world where everybody is happy.

if only ..if only :)

[Revolutionair]

A world where the dear party leader has totalitarian control over the patriotic workers. They proudly tell everyone they come from the motherland. The dear party leader commands the Cheka to keep everything egalitarian. The Cheka patrols the Politburo to persecute anyone suspected of being Trotskyite counter-revolutionary fascist bourgeoisie scum. There is no proof needed for this persecution, the dear party leader was born in the USSR so he is omniscient.

[PassTheBeer]

A world where the dear party leader has totalitarian control over the patriotic workers. They proudly tell everyone they come from the motherland. The dear party leader commands the Cheka to keep everything egalitarian. The Cheka patrols the Politburo to persecute anyone suspected of being Trotskyite counter-revolutionary fascist bourgeoisie scum. There is no proof needed for this persecution, the dear party leader was born in the USSR so he is omniscient.

Dear leader ? Patriotic workers ? Secret police ? This somehow reminds me of something :rolleyes:

[La Peur Rouge]

Dear leader ? Patriotic workers ? Secret police ? This somehow reminds me of something :rolleyes:

The United States?

[revolution inaction]

Since I'm having a little trouble following up with the market/property/theories chit chat.. why not just describe your perfect world. :D
I think that way I will get a clearer picture of what you gentlemen are desiring

The Culture from Iain M. Banks novels.

[PassTheBeer]

The United States?

A joyful non-aggressive country called North Korea

[Weezer]

A joyful non-aggressive country called North Korea

A joyful shut the fuck up.

As for me, my utopia is one that allows the human experience be lived to fullest under the communist mode of production.

[Magón]

One where I can blaze and drink 24/7, and be ridin' a new chick every, every day!!!!

Just kidding... about the ladies, the blazing and drinking is fun.

[scarletghoul]

i have never thought about a 'utopia', theres no point

[PassTheBeer]

A joyful shut the fuck up.



How mature :thumbup1:

[PilesOfDeadNazis]

The only governance we need is self-governance. Otherwise, to govern something is to rule something and to have government is to have rule.
In the terminology I've learned in my short life, I would say you are getting ''government'' mixed up with ''state''. Communism is classless and stateless, but it can't be governmentless. The word ''government'' does not always automatically entail some form of leadership, as it does in today's world.

An economy controlled by the Workers is a government, but not one that we have ever seen. By that time there will be no state, so government will lose its oppressive character and will simply be an administrative system used by the Workers to maintain the Communistic economy. This requires no ''leaders'', militarism, state-control, etc. It's Workers democratically running the economy for the benefit of all. In today's world the government is the elite running things for the benefit of the wealthy minority.

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you on anything other than the meaning of words, though.

But in regards to my idea of Utopia....I have no idea.

I really don't think it's possible to know what the world will be like that far down the line. Especially since our experiances with society and culture have only been within the realm of Capitalism and hierarchy. So I find it pretty hard to predict what's in store for humanity when everything we have known is completely changed and the tables are totally turned around.

Of course, what I am hoping for is a society free and equal(original, I know). Absolutely no cultural differences on gender or race(if there are even different ''races'' by then). And like another comrade said, the established ideas of ''family'' must be thrown out the window. A global society where all resources are used for the good of everyone, rather than for profit. A society where a person can feel completely fulfilled and free from the slavery of mindless toil just for basic things like food on their plates and shelter, while they barely get to truly live.

However, like I said, this is way too far in advance to say what it's all going to be like. Nothing we've ever seen, that's for sure.

[ed miliband]

Something like a Lil Wayne video.

[Ocean Seal]

I want the best education for everyone, the best healthcare for everyone, public projects which are huge, vast natural reserves for everyone to visit, and enough for each to accomplish their dreams. I also want tip top research all over the world. I want science to proceed at an outstanding pace, like it never has before something like the enlightenment period. I also want a strong feeling of community, where everyone knows their neighbors and where the towns are lively with celebration, and the people actually leave their homes (you'll have to excuse me, but where I live is very boring, and know one knows their neighbors).

[PoliticalNightmare]

In the terminology I've learned in my short life, I would say you are getting ''government'' mixed up with ''state''. Communism is classless and stateless, but it can't be governmentless. The word ''government'' does not always automatically entail some form of leadership, as it does in today's world.

An economy controlled by the Workers is a government, but not one that we have ever seen. By that time there will be no state, so government will lose its oppressive character and will simply be an administrative system used by the Workers to maintain the Communistic economy. This requires no ''leaders'', militarism, state-control, etc. It's Workers democratically running the economy for the benefit of all. In today's world the government is the elite running things for the benefit of the wealthy minority.

...Well from what I've understood, the state is a collective body of armed forces and law courts and the government is the elected body which rules the state. Since the government has power over the state, they also have power to pass legislations (through coercion). I would, therefore describe government as being an instrument of rule (specifically minority rule, though I think if it was owned by the majority, it would still be a government). Under communism, the communes would not "rule" as such and each member has choice over membership of communes and equal political power to run commune so I don't know that we can strictly define these communes as governments. Of course they would intervene to protect civil liberties but this is, ideally, where the line would be drawn.

[PassTheBeer]

I want the best education for everyone, the best healthcare for everyone, public projects which are huge, vast natural reserves for everyone to visit, and enough for each to accomplish their dreams. I also want tip top research all over the world. I want science to proceed at an outstanding pace, like it never has before something like the enlightenment period. I also want a strong feeling of community, where everyone knows their neighbors and where the towns are lively with celebration, and the people actually leave their homes (you'll have to excuse me, but where I live is very boring, and know one knows their neighbors).

Sounds like Sweden.. without the global parts ofc

[ckaihatsu]

I'm responding to posts from two threads here, and also posting back to those two threads:


'Delegative Democracy'

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?t=146479


'Describe me your political utopia'

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?t=145956


I'm going to just throw out a simple model I made recently, in an as-is kind of way -- it may intrinsically address some of the points here about delegations for representative purposes, or it may not.

I *will* add that, in this day and age of fluid digital-based communications, we may want to dispense with formalized representative personages altogether and just conceptualize a productive entity within a supply chain network as having 'external business' or 'external matters' to include in its regular routine of entity-collective co-administration among its participants.

(The model and its text are below.)





In the AAFAQ, the author/s suggests that free associations should be built upon principles of direct democracy - i.e. mass assemblies should democratically vote over big decisions while their labour itself is self-managed. Rather than voting in representatives (who are elected once in a while and have power over the masses), delegates (who only have power to carry out the will of the people and would be easily recallable).

My question is, how does this system work exactly? To what extent are decisions voted on? If the division of labour no longer exists and a rota combining hard, boring tasks with more meaningful labour for each citizen is introduced, is this voted on? Or does each labourer have the choice of selecting their lines of labour - getting to pick from a "pool" of work with say 50% being what is deemed trivial, boring and repetitive and 50% being deemed meaningful, fun and enjoyable? Do the majority vote upon the choice of work in the "pool of labour"? To what extent is labour self-managed? To what extent do people in the commune make decisions on the behalf of others? Does there have to be a clear majority for a large scale decision to be passed (i.e. not a 51% majority but say 60%)?

Also, as far as delegates go, what is the system exactly for recalling them? Do people have to make an appeal? To make an appeal does there have to be x number of people? Is there then a mass vote on the appeal? What majority is needed for the delegate to be recalled? How do we ensure that, during the delegate's time in office, they only carry out the will of the majority? How do we ensure that they don't act as tyrant?

How do we ensure that all communes follow these principles? What other questions have I missed out? etc.





there would be congresses of delegates elected both for industries and for regions such as a city or metropolitan area. delegates would be elected by the base assemblies, would have term limits, would have to report back to the assemblies that elect them, could be removed by the base assemblies, would continue to work at their regular job and only be remunerated for the delegate work at the same rate as their regular job. if the rank and file disagree with a decision of a delegate congress, there should be an easy way for a handful to petition to send the proposal back to the base assemblies for discussion and decision.





Rotation system of work roles

A universal template for covering all work roles through time, going forward, for a post-capitalism, moneyless, collectivized political economy

by Chris Kaihatsu, [email protected], 10-10, for 'Allocating jobs' thread at RevLeft.com, tinyurl.com/24tohdc


- Everyone will assist everyone else in the local area with properly fulfilling the duties of any given work role.

- Unit of time per role must remain consistent.

- People in an area of work roles cannot switch their placement in line in the circle.

- Any roles at larger scales are either in addition to local work roles or else are entirely in replacement of smaller-scale work roles.

- New additions to an area of work roles enter the line in the circle at the bottom, beginning their rotation with a half-cycle of less-popular work roles.

- New collectively agreed-upon work roles will be placed in the existing sequence according to their ranking of a scale of 1 to 10, as averaged from the rankings submitted by those in the local area of work roles.


Rotation system of work roles

http://postimage.org/image/1d53k7nd0/

[Sixiang]

I actually wrote a 5 page essay on this for my sociology class, but I'll summarize it into one word: communist.


In communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.
-Marx & Engels