Democratic capitalism (capitalism + democracy) alongside a strong and efficient social welfare system is what I personally adhere to.

  • PugJesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    Oh, I imagine there would need to be quite a few regulations and regulatory bodies to oversee such matters. Even if they were operating with the best of intentions, which are often in short supply, the behavior of entities with narrow goals must be regulated to ensure harmony with the broader goals of the population (like “Living in a society where the rivers don’t catch on fire if you drop a match in them”).

    Power corrupts, and all that jazz - for workers as much as bureaucrats and private parties. Only by ensuring that there are numerous power bases with the ability to effectively restrain one-another, and relatively free entry/advancement in each, can a free equilibrium be maintained in a society.

    Of course, we have quite a few regulations and regulatory bodies nowadays, so the only real question is in the details of it, rather than the general concept. The concept is obviously workable.

    • Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      17 days ago

      Only by ensuring that there are numerous power bases with the ability to effectively restrain one-another, and relatively free entry/advancement in each, can a free equilibrium be maintained in a society.

      Agreed. Any system is going to require a strong system of checks and balances. That’s one of the few good ideas the founding fathers had. They gloriously fucked up the implementation obviously. But the core concept is critical.

      Of course, we have quite a few regulations and regulatory bodies nowadays, so the only real question is in the details of it, rather than the general concept. The concept is obviously workable.

      For now we do.

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 days ago

        For now we do.

        More generally, I meant simply that government regulation is proven as a workable solution, conceptually, to restrain third-parties. The only remaining questions are tied up in ‘how to regulate the details’ and ‘how to maintain the regulatory body’, both of which we are currently experiencing… deep imperfections in the current implementation.

      • snooggums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 days ago

        Agreed. Any system is going to require a strong system of checks and balances. That’s one of the few good ideas the founding fathers had. They gloriously fucked up the implementation obviously. But the core concept is critical.

        Any system with checks and balances will fail when they are ignored. The current US situation is the continuation of at least a century of not holding the people who have tried to overthrow the governement accountable.

        • Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          That’s where they fucked up the implementation. It’s being ignored because 1 party controls all 3 branches of the federal government.

          They implemented a voting system that naturally devolves into a two parry system. Checks and balances don’t work when you are the one checking yourself.