No matter how detailed the designs, any project manager can tell you that a plan ends up changing as it hits certain realities, and a system of governance, even for a small country, is going to be many times more complicated than anything most people have ever worked on. We've already seen several examples of the results, and they failed spectacularly. You don't get to look at them and say "They don't count" or "They're not TRUE scotsmen."

[–] Cowbee@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'm not doing a no true Scotsman, or saying things don't count. I'm saying that you cannot claim something to be a failure wholesale without analyzing what broke.

If you have a plane, and it fails because the screws became loose on the wing, you know what went wrong and have an idea of how to fix it, even if the results were catastrophic. You cannot then say that planes cannot exist.

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'm not claiming planes cannot exist. I'm saying that (assuming this is pre-wright-brothers) there's no proof yet (metaphorical) planes can exist, so it's foolish to criticize our current methods of travel via cars and horses. By deepening the critiques of capitalism (a system I know to have flaws), you're making the claim "It's SO stupid to drive from Ohio to New York, when you could FLY" in a world that hasn't yet established flying is even possible.

It could be that the solution is "Tighten the wing screws a bit more", or it could be that the screws will always come apart from the tension, and it's simply a doomed invention. Ultimately, we'd still need a better proof of concept to devote ANY mental energy to it.

[–] Cowbee@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Not quite analogous. We know many problems with Capitalism, and we know many aspects of leftist organization absolutely work. We know what parts historically did not, and we also know that these issues are far from necessary for building a leftist structure.

You're arguing that there's no point in improving the plane and fixing what is broken when we still have cars and horses.

For your point that it could be that the screws can never be tightened, or a solution without screws cannot be found, is not an argument against tightening the screws or coming up with an alternative method, despite pretending that's a valid reason alone. In fact, in Engineering, it can be known what forces will be applied to screws in flight and as such it can be predicted what is required.

Essentially, you can use previous knowns to solve for unknowns, rather than assuming everything is simply a blind guess.

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

we know many aspects of leftist organization absolutely work. We know what parts historically did not, and we also know that these issues are far from necessary for building a leftist structure.

Facts not in evidence. Don’t invent assertions as truth.

You're arguing that there's no point in improving the plane and fixing what is broken when we still have cars and horses.

I’m going to expect an apology for deliberately putting words in my mouth. You know very well I didn’t say this.

The Wright brothers did not pull commuters into their untested inventions. If you can test and refine without harming or harassing people, do so; otherwise, keep it to yourself.

[–] Cowbee@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

There are mountains of papers written on the success of Socialist and Socialist-adjacent structures. Worker Co-operatives are more stable and provide greater happiness to the Workers within, for example. Democracy within the workplace also has great levels of success when tried, and we've found that liberal democracy surrounding 2 party systems is far less democratic than multiparty, ranked choice systems.

You deliberately argued that you must wait for something to exist before you are willing to adopt it, rather than change any given situation.

Now we reach the pinnacle of your argument: "I'm personally okay in the given system, so I don't care if other people wish to change it." It's fine if everyone agrees with you, but what happens if you get out voted? Are you still going to argue for maintaining the status quo as disparity rises and climate change dooms us all?