Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace Equality
The point of this article is that horizontal organizing and decision making are widespread in contemporary social movements. Yet, you try to flip it into a polemic against popular activism against bank foreclosures and genetic manipulation of agriculture. As if those issues didn't need to be addressed. Did this article really roil you that much steelhouse or are you just trying to channel the trumpster?
Every example in that article is a failure.
1. Workers took back their workplaces in Argentina. Basically means they stole the capital. The machines were owned by someone. Wages were higher pre-2001 than today.
2. Zapatistas seems like thugs and some lives were lost.
Horizontal leadership does not work. If you have 10 people they will not all agree. The strongest will take leadership roles and in the end you got a dictatorship. Look at Cuba or Russia for example.
The United States has had most success with individual rights in a republic. Then the individuals vote the leader who makes the decisions. The leaders and the majority are constantly trying to take the rights away from the minority.
I propose giving the people even more individual rights in free land and equal land. Minority stockholders able to prevent private equity takeovers. I only believe in democracy in things that are mandatory, for example defense, courts, general welfare, and roads. Things like schools the government should not have any involvement in at all. People should choose to live in cities that have schools. Those that don't want schools or firefighters should not have to pay for them by living in cities without them.
you don't need violence to start a movement like you propose, there are corporations like REI. I don't shop there the prices are too high.