Asklemmy

43392 readers

1478 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

Alternatives to congress (lemmy.world)

submitted 3 days ago by Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

81 comments fedilink hide all child comments

What alternative ways can you think of to handle making legislation and passing laws that would negate the increasingly polarized political climate that is happening in more and more countries?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Everyone forms communes that reflect their personal values. I would prefer one with direct democracy, and no representatives.

However big a commune you want, but I'd recommend keeping it at 2000 people or less. Anymore and people start to see each other as strangers, not community members. Plus direct democracy works better with smaller population numbers.

[–] shasta@lemm.ee 6 points 2 days ago

So once you get to 2000 people, how do you determine who to expel? Maybe it would be fairest to expel the people who have the babies, putting them over 2000.

[–] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Hm, I do agree that if you have too many people, things go down hill. But what if one commune decides to use all the water heading to another... or decides their personal values are that other commutes should serve them.

[–] leftytighty@slrpnk.net 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

What this person is proposing is functionally similar to forms of anarchism and anarchist theory has some answers to these kinds of questions.

For example the communes could have a federation where representatives are sent to settle disputes. Likewise instead of a fixed 2000 people with walls between you could have people in several smaller overlapping communities which act as bridges across a network of communities. Similar to how a person can be a family member and a company employee and a resident of an apartment building etc.

Though I don't completely buy in to everything it says, https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-anarchy-works goes into how anarchist communities can and have worked