Maybe so. Maybe capitalism can never remain checked because the temptation to acquire more wealth will always end up winning. You'd like to think that people are better than that, buuuuut...

[–] kaffiene@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Which system IS stable? AFAICT every system ever has allowed some people more power than others and those people cleave more power to themselves over time. This appears to be how most empires fall

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

Good question! The oldest government still in operation appears to be San Marino, a tiny country near Italy, at around 415 years. Considering that even at a small size it's only been around that long despite civilization being around 6000 years old, I think it's safe to say we haven't managed a system that has real staying power yet.

[–] absentbird@lemm.ee 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

There's hunter-gatherer tribes that have been more or less stable for over a thousand years. It's said that the Nez Perce have lived on the Columbia River for 11,500 years.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Yeah, but for the purpose of looking at stable governments in cities, hunter-gather societies aren't a helpful comparison.

[–] kaffiene@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Good points but my question is more about governments that work at the scale of a nation state.

[–] absentbird@lemm.ee 8 points 4 months ago

I think it's possible that nation states are inherently unstable. An improvement on monarchy, but still vulnerable to oligarchy.

I'm not sure what the future holds, or what comes next, but I suspect that federation will play an important role.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (33 replies)