Not necessarily, a mechanic could make some truly disastrous abuses at a nuclear power plant. However, you’re still running into the Bordigist error of fearing the potential for problems over presenting a better solution, and using that potential as a reason to not support the real.
When I’m analyzing existing systems, I can do so theoretically or based on testimony. Testimony can be false, but if it meets ones theoretical expectations, should be considered. The notion that we should look to existing systems instead of inventing new ones is odd coming from a communist, as this is the most common basis for arguments I hear from proponents of political economy as it were. Transforming the social fabric is going to take a little creative problem solving. If you’re interested in a positive argument: https://lemmy.ml/post/46147233/25310663
I already argued against looking to existing systems as a blueprint for different contexts. My point is that we should not take a chauvanist stance and assume we know better than the socialists in Korea that have been building socialism for decades based on your fears that they could be corrupted. I also don’t share your emphasis on horizontalism, the vertical structures that exist in socialism do so because of necessity more than whim.
Do you acknowledge at the very least that the potential for abuse in these positions is less than the position of administrator?
Not necessarily, a mechanic could make some truly disastrous abuses at a nuclear power plant. However, you’re still running into the Bordigist error of fearing the potential for problems over presenting a better solution, and using that potential as a reason to not support the real.
When I’m analyzing existing systems, I can do so theoretically or based on testimony. Testimony can be false, but if it meets ones theoretical expectations, should be considered. The notion that we should look to existing systems instead of inventing new ones is odd coming from a communist, as this is the most common basis for arguments I hear from proponents of political economy as it were. Transforming the social fabric is going to take a little creative problem solving. If you’re interested in a positive argument: https://lemmy.ml/post/46147233/25310663
I already argued against looking to existing systems as a blueprint for different contexts. My point is that we should not take a chauvanist stance and assume we know better than the socialists in Korea that have been building socialism for decades based on your fears that they could be corrupted. I also don’t share your emphasis on horizontalism, the vertical structures that exist in socialism do so because of necessity more than whim.