myth: Professionalism and Servants of the people:
Myth: Any business should be done by professionals.
- No, not by any means. - Professionals should not engage in theft, terrorism and fraud.
But the most dangerous are the professionals of Managed Democracy.
- If a professional gangster kills 20 people, Stalin - 20 million, then post-Putin can kill all of humanity.
Selection of formalists:
`` Professionals '' - managers in authoritarian states are not professionals - due to personnel selection for formalism, diligence and conformism.
Personal loyalty and the presence of compromising evidence are secondary, it is more important that the subordinate is indifferent to the matter and does not interfere.
`` Professionals '' - managers in authoritarian states are focused on the benefit not for the subjects, but for the rulers, - for the stability of the power of the rulers, i.e. to control them, i.e. for reporting.
Benefits not for the subjects are at a minimum - only in order not to cause social tension.
Imaginary professionalism:
Covid-19 showed the inadequacy of existing government mechanisms and rulers:
- Departure for 12 days to a country residence in the midst of an epidemic - British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
- Denial of deaths from Covid-19 - by President of Belarus Lukashenko.
- Statements on the nature of the coronavirus and its danger - by President Trump.
What to do:
1. "Servants of the People" - professionals who depend exclusively on people.
"Servants of the People" - this is the best way out, since people are already deceived by this myth.
2. Professional consumers:
The owner-people themselves must be able to manage.
In all, not only in a successful venture, investors control managers
3. & quot; Advisory structure & quot;
- A structure that helps multiple managers to manage consistently and effectively.
Artificial intelligence can dramatically improve the efficiency of collective management.
4. Constructive counter-propaganda.
Differences from Liquid / Liquid and Delegative / Delegative democracies:
( Liquid Democracy Abstract.docx ; Delegative Democracy Abstract.docx )
The main "difference" is - the realizability of `` Servants of the People '' - in authoritarian states that are critical for the survival of Civilization in the context of the use of mental AI.
Industrial Democracy and Survival:
Industrial democracy, of course, is good, but it was unrealistic.
- The workers themselves preferred more income than their greater power.
The Workers 'Council was less competitive than the Professional Managers' Council.
Trade Unions:
Another thing is that the interests of professional managers are opposite to the interests of workers.
Therefore, it is not necessary to guide the workers in production, but to represent their interests.
It is not necessary to reinvent the bicycle here. - The trade union system already exists here.
Polit. democracy:
More efficient:
1.political control of corporations is outside of corporations, and
2. Redistribution of income - after receiving it by professional managers.
Industrial democracy in the 21st century:
However, the effectiveness of Industrial Democracy is growing in the 21st century due to factors:
1. Increased education of workers
2. An increase in the share of research and development enterprises in which a non-hierarchical organization is effective
3. IT makes the collective mind superior to the CEO.
Survival:
However, all of the above is nonsense and rat fuss over money on the eve of death due to the use of psychic-oriented AI.
Today, Industrial Democracy should be viewed precisely from the point of view of preventing the allocation of social groups interested and capable of using AI to manipulate the crowd.
& nbsp;
Anti-authoritarian socialism and democracy:
& quot; Examples of a society based on production self-government, the spread of democracy in all spheres of life, including production, demonstrated:
- Makhnovist movement in Ukraine in 1918–21, and
- Spanish anarcho-syndicalists and left-wing socialists in Spain in 1936–39.
Both of these experiments did not end as a result of internal problems, but were destroyed by force. ''
Communists are the main enemies of communism and socialism. - The communists blocked the road towards the latter.
The communists, not NATO, led to the collapse of the same Yugoslavian Market Socialism.
Perhaps Socialism - industrial democracy - is real and politically competitive - today.
But today Socialism itself is irrelevant - due to a threat more formidable than the `` exploitation of man by man '' - existential threats.
Socialism today is only useful as an ally against a new threat, since it opposes not only the exploitation of man by man, but also against the rule of man by man.
Anti-capitalism is useful today only because money gives rise to power, economic polarization gives rise to social and political polarization, creates incentives and opportunities to manipulate man by man.
Let 0.1% of people own 99% of wealth and assets. However, not using these assets to the detriment of humanity is a far greater utopia than Socialism is a productive democracy.
& nbsp;
The difference between this approach and classical Libertarian socialism:
Many libertarian socialists believe that workers' associations should manage industrial production, and workers should retain their rights to the products of their labor.
However, this approach may repeat the shortcomings of the state. management - on a smaller scale.
It is necessary to reduce economic inequality not by limiting the forms of economic organization, in particular by managing production only by associations of workers with the preservation of the right to the products of their labor, but by increasing the efficiency of organizational forms - by increasing economic freedom.
In modern conditions, even without hindering competitive forms, the collective forms of organization of production have natural advantages:
1. Decrease in economies of scale of production, re-growth of the share of `` human labor. ''
2. Modern IT, AI-technologies simplify and reduce the cost of collective forms of production management.
It is not necessary to restrict competitive forms, but to advance legal compliance, favor and focus on joint forms of organization.
& nbsp;
Differences between Egalitarian Libertarianism and Mutualism:
The term Mutualism appeared 200 years ago.
The difference between Egalitarian Libertarianism and Mutualism is in purpose. -
The Purpose of Mutualism -
Mutualism offers a specific rather narrow solution - joint ventures, bypassing monopoly institutions supported by the state.
Lack of external investors, not giving profits to the side.
Where there is sufficient economic freedom, equality of economic conditions and the rule of law, and, accordingly, low lending rates, there is a `` mutual organization '' has a low relative efficiency.
Where there is no equality of economic conditions, there is `` mutual organization '' suppressed by the authorities.
& nbsp;
The growth of freedom. Slave, landless peasant, proletarian.
& nbsp;
Mutual Banking
|