you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -5 points 2 days ago (11 children)

There's 8+ billion people and these governments are decades to millenia old. We definitely have the ability to test and see if we wanted. Most of the time though we let society run on pure unadulterated emotions without any care for outcomes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 days ago (5 children)

    That's myopic. China, for example, takes a scientific approach to development through a Marxist-Leninist framework.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

    The question will always be if policies from a different political philosophy or one not yet invented or otherwise canonized are more optimal. We shouldn't be enslaved by a particular way of thinking aka it is / isn't in this political philosophy therefore it will / will not work / be better

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    That is the basis of marxism in a nutshell. It is a scientific framework to observe society and derive conclusions. it is not a set in stone fixed ideology. All real existing socialist projects were and are quite different in practice. And there is a ton of disagreements among leftists about the details. The fundamental common idea is just to create a society that works in the interest of the 99% instead of being controlled by a small capitalist class. How to go about this in detail must change over time since society and the world around us changes all the time. But policies must always be derived from empirical data and the scientific process.

    Right now most policies in capitalist countries are created through a very chaotic and mostly unguided process involving competing capitalist interests and the occasional opposing social movements.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    Can you link to any primary materials ideally from Marx outlining the use of the scientific method for political means? There's all sorts of a minority controlling a majority that aren't capitalistic, monarchy being the classic alongside dictatorships and oligarchies with varying economic structures.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 2 days ago

    Nobody is saying all answers have been discovered, you're confusing political philosophy as a world outlook with a particular formula and set of definite conditions. These aren't the same thing at all, Marxism-Leninism argues against set formula.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

    You know how some physics experiments are difficult because of shit like particles having indeterminacy, behaving differently when observed and interference from other particles making them interact in unpredictable ways? Well, people are even worse.

    That said, geopolitics is a giant live experiment, you need only pay attention and analyse. If you come up with a good enough model of undertanding, you can predict what is the likely the best course of action before taking them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    It's a live experiment. We're always going to be doing something and we will at least have data for that. Like Portugal's decriminalization of drugs has shown to be far more effective than the US war on drugs in decreasing drug use.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

    Exactly. But knowing what worked for Portugal is just one clue. It's also important to have an understanding of why it worked, identifying other factors that could have contributed, ways the policy can be improved, how effective it would be if implemented in vastly different countries ways to adapt policies to those countries, and even expand the concept beyond drugs.

    Imagine a country is going through terrible times and decides to implement some radical austerity measures, sell public companies, defund public services, do all the stuff the IMF loves. Or maybe the opposite, the country nationalizes everything and expels all foreign companies. Let's say a decade or two later the country starts really prospering. It would be unwise to assume this is just universal without proper understanding the mechanics of what happened.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 2 days ago

    why I can't see the current iteration of Democracy to be of value for the future. Humans value knee jerk responses too much even if iys to the dentriment of the ir foot flying off.

    An educated society is just too improbable when the IQ of the average person is on a range tather than a fixed variable.__

  • source
  • parent