chobeat

Indeed context matters and a lot of knowledge cannot be transferred across domains, legal frameworks, or even outside an org. Nonetheless a lot of this knowledge is indeed transferable. How to effectively facilitate a meeting can have culture-specific details, but most of the know-how is transferable. To discover which software is best to adopt to build a CRM is a discussion that can be had before knowing any specifics of your org, and when you know the specifics, you can apply what you know about CRMs to pick the best one. Organizational models can and must be discussed across orgs and countries, to understand if some problem is just an accident or a model is fundamentally unfit for a specific goal.

I was thinking more about practical knowledge to employ today, rather than political speculation on hypothetical societal/political structure. I need people to get better at facilitating meetings, tracking tasks, and writing notes. Until then, discussing democratic centralism is sterile escapism.

Indeed, but these seem to be mostly focused on political topics, rather than organizing per se. I've rarely seen content about organization design, facilitation, effective communication, process design or other similar topics. It's usually sociology/economy/political theory stuff for what I've found.

The lemmy users have only interpreted the world in various ways, the point, however, is to change it.

I'm not talking about organizing on social media platforms. I'm talking about learning, sharing expertise, and interesting material on how to build organizations.

I'm part of many local orgs and I'm not talking about "organizing over social media", but rather to discuss the topics surrounding the practice and theory of organization building with other people interested in the topic and practicing it.

I'm one of the people organizing such activities, not within a union but through a similar dynamic. While that's a great way to build capacity and know-how, it's very narrow and slow to evolve. There's plenty of research and discussion on how to build democratic organizations more effectively, and this kind of discussion doesn't happen within a single org. When it does, it's often very disconnected from reality and uninteresting. This kind of know-how can totally be circulated through social networks (not necessarily social media, but also) when the exchange is on topics of interest on a global scale.

Actual org work is handled in orgs.

I fundamentally disagree. This mindset is why so many leftist orgs still operate through processes, governance structures, and methodologies invented when the horse was the main vector to transfer information. There are plenty of spaces to become better at organizing, and digital spaces to exchange expertise and grow are important.

because the techniques, practices, assets, learning material and so on should circulate and the format of social bookmarking platforms like lemmy is good for that.

I have several telegram groups, discords, facebook groups, and slacks, together with traditional forums hat collect people from all over the world interested in organization building, facilitation, strategy development, tooling, and so on and so forth. On lemmy though, there's very little and it's a pity.

My partner is a chef and fermenter, so it's really hard to keep a food routine because she endlessly chases novelty. That said, when the need for novelty is low, we split evenly between rice, pasta and potatoes for carbs (she's Chinese, I'm Italian, we live in Germany so...). Proteins are eggs and tofu as staple. White beans and chickpeas are less common. A rotation of different cuts of meat on top. Fish here is expensive and bad, but we always have a can of sardines or tuna. Often we buy a whole chicken for the week to do a roast, a fried rice and a pot of stock for the week. Vegetables and fruit are the things we rotate the most because they are all equally bad.

I think this depends on whether it’s properly implemented. If it’s properly implemented, it’s Universal and does therefore not depend on social compliance.

No system willingly surrender its power. Any implementation of UBI in the current power structure will just reproduce the current power structure.

I disagree. Giving resources to people solves problems, including housing, education, and medical care. Maybe the details of where and how to allocate the resources need more elaboration.

If this happens in a way that benefit people, it means the power shift already happened and the UBI is just the consequence of it, not the cause. The hard problem is the power shift, not the details of the UBI, that are reduced to a technical problem. Technical solutions follow from a rearrangement of society, not the other way around, despite what hackerinos and techbros believe.

Actually, I would like to keep the system from collapsing. If it does collapse, it will cause devastating harm on not only you, but all of society, probably turning it into ruins and a state-beyond-return.

The current system based on consumption, growth, and the industrial/post-industrial productive mode is unsustainable. It's going to collapse regardless of UBI. Conservatives and reactionaries are so supportive of UBI exactly because it has the power to extend the "business as usual" a little longer, until bigger factors like soil exhaustion, climate collapse, biosphere collapse, oil EROI and other major factors will eventually make our mode of living unfeasible. That's not an argument against UBI per se, but we should be wary of how it can be appropriated to make our life worse and this is a very concrete consequence. UBI as a starting step (good) vs UBI as a pacifier (bad).

Realistically, that’s not gonna happen. There’s not gonna be a “worker’s revolution” in the US. The rich take it all, leaving nothing for the poor. Dreams of a “revolution” are fairytales people tell themselves at night to sleep easier. If you really want change and to improve lifes, advocate for UBI. It really helps.

I'm not a revolutionary. I don't believe revolutions have ever happened. I also don't believe a major political change is going to happen in fascist USA anytime soon, unless Trump really fucks up his game. Sometimes there are just no good moves.

UBI without worker's power and strong unions will just become a leash in the hands of the state to enforce social compliance. Unions and UBIs are not mutually exclusive. Also without strong unions, who do you think will advocate for UBIs? Neo-nazi, billionaires, and other people that want to give the bare minimum to defend the status quo from its collapse. The first to talk about UBI in the USA was Nixon, and it's not by chance. The élites see the UBI as yet another tool to maintain the status quo and their privilege, giving scraps to the rest and subduing the state to make their own interest. UBI is a technical tool and therefore, by itself, it doesn't solve social problems or shifts power. The shift of power should happen contextually to the introduction of the UBI, otherwise, it will just turn into yet another way to oppress the working class.

Malazan is everything but soft. Its magic system and the world building in general look like what a programmer with a degree in reddit history would build