• bouh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I firmly disagree. No state merely means a feudal state in my opinion, with the rich and companies being the lords. You can’t prevent them from seizing and enslaving places and people without a strong authority to rule them.

    Then, making a state work for the people rather than the companies is another matter.

    • schmorp@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Unless you can somehow make a state hold itself accountable for its actions I don’t see that we’ll ever get a state that works for the people. Of course there’s a spectrum with some states worse than others, but to have to constantly fight off authoritarian structures who want more power over you shouldn’t be the norm.

      • bouh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s what democracy is trying to do.

        On the other hand, as I said, no state means a feudal state. If rich men or organisation are not reigned in some way, they will seize the power for themselves. It is actually what’s happening in liberal countries.

        With more cynism it is how societies work: an armed group seize a place for its profit or comfort. Until it’s submitted to a more powerful armed group. Democracy arise when the armed group want peace from the people under its rule. Or when the people are the biggest part of the army and get to organise themselves to take over.