886
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

The Democracy of the founding fathers was Greek Democracy, predicated upon a slave society, and restricted to only the elite. This is the society we live in today, even with our reforms towards direct representation. The system is inherently biased towards the election of elites and against the representation of the masses. Hamilton called it “faction” when the working class got together and demanded better conditions, and mechanisms were built in (which still exist to this day) that serve to ensure the continued dominance of the elite over the masses. The suffering of the many is intentional. The opulence of the wealthy is also. This is the intended outcome.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

By definition, publicly owned services cannot be a monopoly. That's because it's publicly owned. Capitalism and monopoly arise from private ownership.

[-] knitwitt@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Your definition doesn't seem to be correct. This article mentions government granted monopolies (i.e hydro) and states monopolies (i.e healthcare).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government-granted_monopoly

Contrary to what I said earlier, residents of certain provinces have been complaining that the quality of their healthcare has been substandard, and are upset that there are no alternatives available as the law forbids private doctors from even setting up shop there.

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

a government grants exclusive privilege to a private individual or firm

That is not public healthcare. That would be like the US only allowing Mayo Clinic to operate. Public healthcare is provided by the government.

[-] colin@lemmy.uninsane.org 3 points 1 year ago

that seems kinda revisionist. if i think i have a better way in which to provide healthcare, am i allowed to pursue that alongside others who consent? if “no”, then something has monopolized healthcare — be it a private entity, public, or some combination.

the libertarian refrain is “government is the monopoly on violence”, and that seems broadly true, even if the police force is publicly directed… no?

[-] BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf 4 points 1 year ago

That’s not a libertarian refrain, just one that they stole from the left. Like the name Libertarian itself, which actually means communist essentially.

[-] colin@lemmy.uninsane.org 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

bleh. arguing over words and definitions is a stupid waste of time. i shouldn't care what "monopoly" or "libertarian" or any other word means to someone else, i should only care if they embrace the ideas that help us work together.

sure, i'm against private monopolies -- whatever word you want to use to describe it. i think it's accurate that government is that player which is granted the "exclusive use of force considered to be legitimate", even if that's a mouthful.

anyway, i yield the floor for as long as the topic is definitional instead of substantial 👋

[-] BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf 2 points 1 year ago

Cheers! Thanks for chatting. I’m out too for now. Take care!

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I see that mental trap of yours. Without getting into the weeds, I'm a type of anarchist. I don't believe the state should exist in the first place, healthcare belongs to the commons. You're trying to suggest that private healthcare is your "better way", so no, it shouldn't be allowed. As long as the state exists, that argument will be used. Therefore we should eliminate the hierarchy that justifies ownership over the means of production.

this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2023
886 points (99.9% liked)

196

16713 readers
2717 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS