7 Point Left-Right Political Scale- Where do you sit?

[sledger]

I don't know how true this is generally. The Mafia count as a private institution, yeah?

But yeah Vimes's graph is facile. I think it's supposed to be but I dunno.

Exception that proves the rule

 

[Spark]

There are substantial qualitative differences between "impossible situations" which the state is/could be capable of imposing, and the private sector equivalent. To deny this is to deny reality.

Well, sure, they are different. But they're not irrelevant, which is surely more important in day-to-day life.

 

[sledger]

I don't think anyone has claimed they are irrelevant. Unless you count Vimes' graphic, which claims they aren't a thing at all.

 

[Spark]

I don't think anyone has claimed they are irrelevant. Unless you count Vimes' graphic, which claims they aren't a thing at all.

I mean I don't think the graphic is meant to be taken so seriously as to be taken as a claim of literal equality. I thought it was more saying that both were unacceptable to a (left-)anarchist, which they obviously would be.

Nuance is the first thing that goes out the window when you go that far in one political direction or another.

 

[sledger]

I mean I don't think the graphic is meant to be taken so seriously as to be taken as a claim of literal equality. I thought it was more saying that both were unacceptable to a (left-)anarchist, which they obviously would be.

Nuance is the first thing that goes out the window when you go that far in one political direction or another.

But it does explicitly state there is no distinction between the two, so I'm not sure how it can be interpreted as such.

If I read it in anything but a literal way it comes across as a something written by someone on the right attempting to satirise the narrow-minded people on the left who actually believe the aforementioned literal interpretation.

 

[Spark]

But it does explicitly state there is no distinction between the two, so I'm not sure how it can be interpreted as such.

If I read it in anything but a literal way it comes across as a something written by someone on the right attempting to satirise the narrow-minded people on the left who actually believe the aforementioned literal interpretation.

Ah, but you're forgetting the far-left tendency to go "doesn't meet my own self-imposed standards, therefore terrible and therefore all the same". Cf every far-leftist approach to a modern election.

 

[GIMH]

If and when corporations have a monopoly on force I'll accept their point.

 

[sledger]

Ah, but you're forgetting the far-left tendency to go "doesn't meet my own self-imposed standards, therefore terrible and therefore all the same". Cf every far-leftist approach to a modern election.

Yeah, I guess that's kind of why I thought the thing could be a satire tbh.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

While fully state planned economies will fail to provide enough food and shelter for everyone, and therefore are not the solution, private institutions are happy to refuse you access to food and shelter if you're not productive enough. They're quite capable of killing you if you don't conform, just like state institutions are.

 

[Spark]

If and when corporations have a monopoly on force I'll accept their point.

At that point then they would surely become the state by definition? Albeit an unusually grim version from my POV. Imagine Facebook running a country.

 

[Uppercut]

At that point then they would surely become the state by definition? Albeit an unusually grim version from my POV.

IIRC the name for this type of dystopia is "Russia".

 

[Spark]

IIRC the name for this type of dystopia is "Russia".

Yeah, petrostates are a common variant of these. There are a few of those dotted around, I think.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah, petrostates are a common variant of these. There are a few of those dotted around, I think.

Yeah. Basically shows that state size is pretty irrelevant to outcomes within any vaguely reasonable bounds. And often only nominal anyway. If the institutions are extractive it doesn't matter whether they're technically part of the government or not.

 

[GIMH]

At that point then they would surely become the state by definition? Albeit an unusually grim version from my POV. Imagine Facebook running a country.

basically my point

 

[GIMH]

While fully state planned economies will fail to provide enough food and shelter for everyone, and therefore are not the solution, private institutions are happy to refuse you access to food and shelter if you're not productive enough. They're quite capable of killing you if you don't conform, just like state institutions are.

I can buy food for someone who can't afford it, no such option in a state economy where we all starve together

The oppposite to communism isn't corporate control anyway. Corporations thrive in part thanks to government.

 

[GIMH]

While we are talking alternate compasses