Lol I have so many conversations like this. Someone was saying a bunch of people got laid off at their job during covid and they almost lost their house. I said something like "it's a shame that they didn't just temporarily decrease everyone's hours so you all still had work. I mean, the work was going to come back eventually".
And they of course agreed
I think many will obey the decision, just not the USA, Canada, terf island, the E.U., you know the usual culprits for not following international law.
Within at least physics, there is still a lot of importance placed on "prestigious" journals like Phys Rev. So it's not so simple. Why would authors trust something published in the "Journal for Comradely Science"? It makes it very difficult to start something just due to the scientific cultural inertia.
Realistically it is 100% possible. But it's the same issue the rest of the working class runs into: insufficient organization. The push for open source in its current form is just a way to make science open without affecting the profits of these huge journals. It costs the author to publish in a journal (which usually means the government allocates x-dollars within grants to pay for publishing). So it's a farce tbh.
If there are education and experience requirements imposed on judicial candidates, and then they are elected, this is not an issue. Because those who are elected are accountable to those who elected them
(provided they can be removed from.power by the same people, which is one of those "checks and balances" Western "democracies " have imposed so we can't remove them).
That way you have professionals/experts who are accountable to the people. Obviously elections can always be tampered with and influenced by powerful and moneyed interests, but by assuming this is true and then making it the default is a bit daft tbh.
If you are elected into a position where you can enact change, those who elected you have expectations of you based on the policy you supported during the election.
If, then, you turn around and do something completely different your actions no longer reflect the will of those who elected you, and you are not behaving in a representative manner and thus in an undemocratic way.
So ignoring anything specific to the American system, class interests, etc., it is a losing battle to try and be anything different from the status quo and getting elected by aligning yourself with the status quo.
A communist who gets elected by siding with a fascist is no longer a communist. A liberal cannot be a liberal if they denounce capitalism and side with socialists. They are fundamentally different ideas of who the political economy is designed for, completely contradictory ideas about hierarchy, property rights, human rights, and even what constitutes truth (liberal ideas are often utopian, like the "rational economic man", and socialist/communist ideas are often based in the reality of the current and past material conditions, like believing people need homes and food, and a wealthy society should be able to provide these for itself, so people get homes and food. In contrast a liberal society would let the "market" provide these things in whatever way is profitable.
I mean, private ownership by those who don't do the work or consume the product, yet get to make the decisions is to blame, yes. And that is capitalism by definition so... Capitalism is to blame....
The only identity politics I want to see is us against the ruling elite. Everything else is sparkling fascism.
I'm not siding with you, but I'd like to take your idea and make it..... Useful.
Anytime someone engages in civil disobedience (like a protest) it is crucial that the correct people are targeted.
For example: if you want to stop your school from investing in Israel you target the administration (President, VP, investment managers etc.) and specifically those who make the decisions. This could be protesting at fundraisers so that it deeply affects the image of the school and those in charge, and serves as a threat of reduced funding.
You wouldn't, for example, go into the classroom during a lecture and yell about Israel, making the lives of the students and professors worse. Why? Because the source of power and social change is the students, staff, and faculty, at the school. And annoying them creates more enemies rather than allies.
Always do a "power analysis" to know who to talk to and bring on your side, and who you need to disrupt in order to make the change. Otherwise we ignore class solidarity (yes, soak up the pun) and are doomed to fail
That's too bad tbh. It seems like a trend following "good times" under capitalism
I know it's not your point, but learning about the Nordics way of doing things was an entry point for me to actually learn about alternatives to capitalism. All I'm saying is it's likely a great entry point of discussion with well meaning liberals, especially where they are rolling back safety nets.
Yeah maybe, they do have the fastest gaming processors, and most efficient workstation processors if you use the x3d for workstations.
I hope not. I'll likely be buying a bit of an upgrade in the next 6 months....
Even if it's true that people are stupid (which is also a narrative pushed which ensures apathy) that is completely irrelevant. Why is it that these apparently stupid people believe the "wrong thing"? Well, it's the same as always. The capitalists are better organized than us, and those supporting them know of no other alternatives. So for a successful revolution the oppressed class needs to get better organized (which IS happening, albeit slowly).
If YOU feel apathetic, please find a socialist/communist/radical left party/group and join it. It can help immensely