Most of the time when you destroy the system you get a much worse system.
Iran got rid of the Shah and got the current freedom loving regime.
The Russians kicked out the old Communist Party and got a KGB trained billionaire in charge.
Iran got rid of the Shah and got the current freedom loving regime.
Why, and what came before. 🤔
Also ignoring the US involvement.
Yeah that’s my point
what came before. 🤔
A better system that was destroyed and replaced by worse one? Proving Dagwood222 right?
Why?..
Why?..
Is that in any way relevant to the point Dagwood222 was making?
Yes, it is. History and medfling does in fact matter in explaining current world events.
He is not explaining current world events, he is making one simple statement. The why has no relevance to the truth of that one statement (as far as I can tell). It seems to me you don’t like the statement, so you try to bring in irrelevant points instead of accepting it. This is the kind of irrational thinking that makes people vote for Trump. I am not saying this to insult you, all humans are prone to this kind of thinking. I say it so you can strive to improve.
Of course, if I am mistaken, then just ignore this.
Blaming the US for the excesses of the Iranians is like excusing Charles Manson because he was abused as a child.
Are you intetionally this ignorant or did the school system fail you?
Mohammad Mosaddegh (Persian: محمد مصدق, IPA: [mohæmˈmæd(-e) mosædˈdeɢ] ⓘ; 16 June 1882 – 5 March 1967) was an Iranian politician, author, and lawyer who served as the 30th Prime Minister of Iran from 1951 to 1953, elected by the 16th Majlis. He was a member of the Iranian parliament from 1923, and served through a contentious 1952 election into the 17th Iranian Majlis, until his government was overthrown in the 1953 Iran coup aided by the intelligence agencies of the United Kingdom (MI6) and the United States (CIA), led by Kermit Roosevelt Jr.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Mosaddegh
In his place, they installed the brutal regime of the Shah. Obviously when you have external influence hindering progress like that the backlash is often strong men and autocracies as are more resistant to such meddling.
If you want we can continue with how the US government went on to help and fun the Iraq/Iran war following the, unfortunately theocratic, revolution.
So, you’re saying that because the Shah was terrible in 1979 it’s okay for the current people to be terrible now?
Right now Vietnam is a very popular tourist destination for Americans. I know people who have been there several times and want to go back.
Literally two comments ago you were saying this:
Most of the time when you destroy the system you get a much worse system.
Was the Shah good or bad? Is it important that what came before the Shah was a popular democratic system that the US destroyed? Is that destruction justified if it becomes a great vacationing spot for Americans?
You’re all over the place bud.
So we agree. The revolution didn’t actually improve things for most people.
No lol, we do not agree.
There are numerous examples of revolutionary change bringing better, more equitable systems of governance.
The only pattern I see is that the ones where the US is involved end up turning to shit.
That’s entirely besides the point.
How is it ‘beside the point’ when it’s exactly my point?
“Yeah, well, not enough of you people chose to die horrible, painful deaths at the hands of the brutal blood soaked dictator our country put into power. Therefore, it’s your fault too.”
Strangely enough I suspect a significant amount of Americans would excuse Charles Manson. There’s a giant movement right now to get the Menéndez brothers out of prison because they were abused. Charles Manson would also be helped by the fact that he was a racist white dude trying to ignite a race war.
Destroying a system means there isn’t anything in place and also that you weaken the power of your own side because you had to go through all the violence needed.
That’s obvious but it also explains why worse system can rise, but also that it’s not always a doomed endeavor. I think the context has a lot to do with what will occurs next.
The best exemple i could give is the French Revolution. It was followed by the worst Napoleonic wars. But its philosophers founded the building block for the republic that’s still in place to this day.
The red revolution against tsarist has brought a lot of positive foundation from which Russian could arguably have builded upon after the war, if not for Gorbachev.
I’m not gonna go to much into any hypothetical but what Lenin created had a real and positive influence in the rest of Europe at least.
At the worst end of the spectrum Iran really had nothing left to build upon, the situation there is catastrophic on all front. So if not for the US the country isn’t gonna stand on its legs any time soon.
I think the evolution of the end of a system, even through those three exemple, can go into so many different path. It’s hard to really predict anything, especially without taking into account all the parameters and context.
Describe the job of a sysadmin in one meme.
systemd meme
Computers are very dumb things that will do exactly what you tell them to. You accidently forgot that you told them to infinitely add +1 to a finite number? Boy it sure will
That’s why morons voted for Trump to tear down the system.
Right, right, they voted for Trump to tear down a fundamentally white supremacist society.
Yay you.
!tankieposting
Tankies just want social-democracy without the democracy part (a social-autocracy), and often have the same exact work moralism as hustle bros. We libertarian-socialists, on the other hand, are your friend.
We tried to get things better by working with liberals. They only wanted our votes. And lately they’ve been giving us less and less reasons to do so, and even less for the less politically literate. If the democrats are going in the direction they’re currently, their only saving grace next election will be that they won’t do further harm, because they were been told by some people they were “too far left”.
when you destroy something many use, you should have a working replacement ready to plug into the space
Hard disagree. Else, there would never be any revolution, but history shows otherwise.
Or, as Marcuse put it, the prerequisite for radically rejecting something is not that you have to know what will come afterwards, but at first, you’ll enter a process of rejection of the existing situation and during this process of rejection, you’ll gradually free yourself from shackles and figure out what is to come next.when has anyone in a position of power ever done what they should?
Well go on then. Bunch of leftists protest voted or didn’t vote. Y’all got what you wanted, an expedited collapse. So go on then. Your turn. Burn it down.
If we had the power to burn it down we would have burned it down hundred years ago.
Exactly. It’s a pipe dream for petulant toddlers who don’t like the very hard work of fixing the broken system with a broken system.
It’s a pipe dream
Really? Is that why they’ve spent trillions throughout the last century on capitalist and fascist propaganda every year to convince you it’s just a “pipe dream?”
They spent billions of dollars creating the military complex to ensure it stays a pipe dream.
That’s a rather silly thing to do - create an entire military-industrial complex to crush a mere “pipe dream.” That is, unless you are suggesting that they know perfectly well that it’s most definitely not a mere “pipe dream?”
Armed revolution WASN’T a pipe dream. Now it is. Not sure where my point is being lost here…
They’d better hope then that nothing bad happens to their precious military-industrial complex, then, eh?
You know, like losing their access to the imperial holdings that supplies it with cheap fuel, cheap resources and cheap labor?
Nah, the electrical college is supposed to prevent some of this shit
The system is broken and can be fixed
By destroying it
I don’t really like the “as intended” take because it fails Hanlon’s Razor. Even Karl Marx understood that Capitalism is doomed to a crisis and revolution cycle, not because that’s what anyone wants, but because it is a law of nature.
The same is true of first-past-the-post voting.
The resolve to tear it down is still plausible though. I don’t know whether it is possible to escape capitalism without a revolution. The alternative is a perfect storm of progressive legislation that seems unlikely to occur in my lifetime.
Good luck with that. A couple of weeks without hair appointments and the million Karen march started right up with the assistance of the monied interests that really run this place. The people in this country are more willing to sacrifice others than to undergo the inconvenience of changing their hair appointments.
The people of this country claim to want positive change, but the change they really want is more lethal police, more tax cuts for the rich, more deportations, more punishment, more violence for those stepping out of line, and more jail slaves.
America will never get any better without first even partially living up to its “melting pot” “community” and “brotherly love” rhetoric, and there’s not even a slim fucking chance of that ever happening in my opinion.
We hate each other, we hate ourselves, and we accept politics that vibes well with the pervasive notions that the poor deserve their shitty lot in life, that people who don’t look, sound, eat, live, or pray like us are terrible, that women should be in the kitchen, that education is for nerds, and that rich people and famous people are inherently better than us.
I’d post quotes of George Carlin explaining twenty years ago that we should stop voting for rich people that don’t give a shit about us, or Vonnegut saying how the poor hate themselves in this country in a book he wrote decades ago but the only nerds interested in such things have already seen, heard, or read them.
They’re the same picture
Here I thought this was a programming joke about programmers blaming the code/hardware for throwing random bugs that differ somehow from the very direct instructions they compiled.
