Leaked files reviewed by The Grayzone expose the covert war waged by British intelligence against Russia in the Black Sea, outlining Ukrainian “honey trap” plots along with blueprints for blowing up the Kerch Bridge. Sensitive documents reviewed by The Grayzone indicate that the United Kingdom is the central architect behind Ukrainian military operations targeting Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. Among other explosive findings, the files reveal high-ranking British military and intelligence figures drew up detailed plans to “maximize attrition of [Moscow’s] […]
It’s almost like replacing economic competition with an examination-based competency competition.
The economic competition drives corruption and then every bit of the ladder slowly fills up with people incentivized by wanting to be part of the in-crowd because that gets you the money. Then the leadership uses that incentive to drive out all competition until there’s nothing left, they build an ideological monopoly driven by economic incentive.
I think the thing you want to build a system around is avoiding the tendency to trend towards ideological monopoly. When ideological monopoly is achieved that’s when the positions of leadership start ensuring everyone is a sycophant, and this end of empire behaviour occurs.
There is still probably a one true correct ideological position in any given topic but the risks of the system eating itself when this spiral occurs make building in some ideological diversity much safer than not.
Exactly, and I’d argue this is precisely what makes capitalism inherently unstable. It creates inequality by design, and that directly translates into corruption. Mass inequality is fundamentally incompatible with having a stable system of governance. Amusingly, it can also be argued that capitalism discourages material analysis because large capitalists tend to be removed from things like engineering, or factory production, and the whole system evolves towards financialization over time. So, the critical understanding of how the material world actually works is largely absent within the decision making class.
It’s almost like replacing economic competition with an examination-based competency competition.
The economic competition drives corruption and then every bit of the ladder slowly fills up with people incentivized by wanting to be part of the in-crowd because that gets you the money. Then the leadership uses that incentive to drive out all competition until there’s nothing left, they build an ideological monopoly driven by economic incentive.
I think the thing you want to build a system around is avoiding the tendency to trend towards ideological monopoly. When ideological monopoly is achieved that’s when the positions of leadership start ensuring everyone is a sycophant, and this end of empire behaviour occurs.
There is still probably a one true correct ideological position in any given topic but the risks of the system eating itself when this spiral occurs make building in some ideological diversity much safer than not.
Exactly, and I’d argue this is precisely what makes capitalism inherently unstable. It creates inequality by design, and that directly translates into corruption. Mass inequality is fundamentally incompatible with having a stable system of governance. Amusingly, it can also be argued that capitalism discourages material analysis because large capitalists tend to be removed from things like engineering, or factory production, and the whole system evolves towards financialization over time. So, the critical understanding of how the material world actually works is largely absent within the decision making class.