Democrats should run a scorched-earth message on the media environment!

[Wilhelm44]

5 hours ago, Cred said:

I'm not advocating for defeatism, I'm advocating for marxist-leninist organizing instead of putting hope into the democrats.

The problem with the democrats is that no matter how nice and cool they sometimes seem, they are still pro free market and don't realize that the free market is what birthed Trump and will ensure that they will always be people like Trump and Epstein as long as the American dream is intact.

No system, no matter how idealistic, will prevent monsters from rising to the surface.  Switching systems wont solve the human condition. Communism also produced it's fair share of monsters.

[zazen]

Countries are usually in tension with:

- constraining (abuses of power ie corruption of private interests capturing national interest)

- coordinating (state capacity to collectively execute on shared goals and a vision)

- correcting (mistakes through feedback, adjusting / aligning incentives).

Whatever system best balances constraints, coordination and correction works - not the simplistic binary of democracy vs authoritarian.

Communism went hard on constraining private capital. It centralised coordination (in the state) but erased the correction mechanism of pricing signals and human incentives. China overcame this by not centrally planning and micromanaging the economy but instead directing and disciplining it - it has a market economy but isn’t owned by the market or private capital. Clear hierarchy exists where the state remains sovereign over the market and capital. The tricky part remains constraining the state itself to remain disciplined. 

The West went hard on constraining the state. There came a disdain and suspicion of power and authority due to past abuses of formal power (feudalism, kings). What emerged was structural (a system of checks and balances) and cultural (enlightenment philosophy emphasising individual liberty). Formal state power was constrained to prevent tyranny, but informal private power of the individual wasn’t to the same  degree. Formal authority became fragmented and sluggish enough that no actor can discipline informal power fast enough.

Informal power now works to steer the state to its benefit rather than align to it - clear hierarchy doesn’t exist because the centre (state) is weak. Hence we have a “deep state” permanent blob of private groups (factions) with overlapping interests using or skirting the state for their own ends.

Any state action that attempts to check, discipline or direct private individuals or capital is seen as a slippery slope to tyranny as a liberal / libertarian reflex. Liberalism fails to protect itself from private domination of oligarchic capital, corporate and intelligence elites - because it succeeded in protecting itself from the state being able to dominate. It optimized to prevent tyranny by distributing formal powers, which strengthened constraints on formal abuse but weakened state capacity to constrain informal abuse.

The West is feeling disoriented because there’s no clear visible tyranny (of a state dictator) but also no clear hierarchy of a sovereign state that feels trusted enough to protect citizens interests against private interests dominating. Progressive libs railing against hierarchy actually need a hierarchy that isn’t predatory but protective.

Communism ate itself through overcentralising what should have been PARTIALLY left to the market of individuals - neo-liberalism hollows itself through over diffusing power and responsibility, assuming free individuals and markets self correct without state authority to intervene.

The West lacks coordination to be productive and competitive against rising global players who are able to coordinate better and faster (China) and lacks the ability to constrain informal power of private capital interests that don’t care for national interests. Checks and balances to prevent tyranny now get in the way of coordination and execution speed - by the time something is decided the conditions are already different.

Communism feared and crushed capital = bureaucracy dominated. Neoliberalism / liberalism feared the state and fragmented it  = allowing for capital to dominate more easily. Both are overcorrections from prior abuse. Balance would be a state strong enough to discipline capital, but constrained enough not to dominate society. That constraint can come from structure but also culture. 

Cultures producing quality people can make even crappy systems work compared to better systems with lower quality people running them. Culture and structure both matter ie ground up vs top down. Perhaps even better to have a system that selects for the best quality to rise to the top through meritocratic filtering (rather than a popularity contest) ie discernocarcy - those with discernment govern.  Whilst simultaneously having a wider culture raising the quality of the general population through good values and virtues. The right culture doesn’t need to get rid of hierarchy or structure but humanises and nurtures it towards better outcomes.

[Cred]

On 27/02/2026 at 7:55 PM, Wilhelm44 said:

No system, no matter how idealistic, will prevent monsters from rising to the surface.  Switching systems wont solve the human condition. Communism also produced it's fair share of monsters.

The notion that "power corrups necessarily" is a deepity contructed by the controlled "left". It's not true.

If someone has has written multiple volumes on marxist theory, they are already more capable leaders than every leader that has ever existed in capitalist countries. This is the case for Lenin, Mao, Stalin, Kim Il Sung, Xi Jin Ping. 

The reason is, if someone is so concerned with theory, the chances are high, that they don't care about ideology and only care about truth. These are the people who are not corrupted, even when they recieve absolute ideological power.

[Cred]

On 04/03/2026 at 11:25 AM, zazen said:

Communism ate itself through overcentralising what should have been PARTIALLY left to the market of individuals

I agree with this. However it needs to be noted that any time you make any deals with the bourgeoisie, you risk them stabbing you in the back. When every oligarch in the world is in prison, having their assets taken or dead, then the people can finally live in peace and freedom.

[Cred]

On 04/03/2026 at 11:25 AM, zazen said:

Cultures producing quality people can make even crappy systems work compared to better systems with lower quality people running them

You can have a nation of self actualized people and the nation is still dogshit if the interest of the capital is above the interst of the people