▲ | mulmen 3 days ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Capitalism is an economic system. It’s not a system of government. The government exists to solve the problems the economic system can’t. I think it’s dangerous to apply corporate management practices to the system that literally governs such systems. How do you know what can be rebuilt better? If you can identify these systems why can’t you modify them? If destruction is constructive don’t you have to concede that whatever you build next also deserves destruction? And if so why build it at all? If you can’t articulate specific failures and propose solutions now then why would you be able to post-destruction? What properties make a post-Soviet system worthy of keeping? Why shouldn’t those systems also be constructively destroyed? Why should we apply constructive destruction to non-Soviet systems? If your entire plan is to break things how do you ever build? What philosophy guides your rebuilding process? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | ACCount37 3 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The point is to remove the most egregious of failures, and let literally anything else take their place. Sometimes things fail so badly that a randomly initialized system outperforms them. Sometimes things fail so badly that no system at all outperforms them. The point is: recognize that and apply destruction. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|