RUclipsr Peter Santenello does something similar! Travels around learning about real American communities and subcultures in a curious non-judgmental way.
I think the "Forward" party is a good name, but I think a better name would be the "American Capitalism" party. It would neutralize the most common epithet used against the movement. (That being that it is "communist" when it is actually the exact opposite of communist--getting wealth and power to individuals from the state.)
In many ways terms like capitalism and socialism are last century terms. The definitions of both are skewed and both have essentially lost most of their meaning. We really don't have a capitalist society as originally envisioned in the 19th and early 20th centuries. We have a corporatist system with vestiges of capitalist markets. It would be wrong to call it socialist because socialisms vary with some believing in centralized decision-making through the government in the name of the "people", but that experience has left a sour taste in most people's mouths, even among socialists (think the Soviet experience), while others are looking at different models. One possibility the Forward Party might explore is to advocate to "democratize" capital as a goal to serve as a check on the rise of AI/AGI as humans are slowly replaced as producers in the economy. If capital accounts for all (considered a conservative worker capitalism idea) were married to decentralized community ownership and coordination of local economic growth encouraging worker owned firms (considered a decentralist socialist idea) as part of that process, you achieve what socialists have been clamoring for for more than a century, yet you still have local control, functioning "capitalist"--if the term must be used--markets, and a freer society with broad-based ownership. It ain't traditional capitalism and it ain't traditional socialism, but it might be the next system. The democratization of capital also puts humans in charge of how, when, where and how much, AI/AGI can produce and how it is deployed going beyond a few senior managers in far away offices making world altering decisions with no real accountability beyond a narrow band of shareholders. There was a political economist some years ago advocating something like this and he would ask his audience: if you don't like corporate capitalism and you don't like state socialism, what do you want?
@@gregorysouthworth783 I would say that Andrew Yang already named this type of economy. Human-centered capitalism is what he used ushered by UBI where no one is left behind! Since the days of Reagan's supply side economics where corporations are bailed out because it's "too big to fail" mantra shift to Demand side economics where no one is left behind. All in all, humanity first regardless of names is used!
@@matsal3211 I sincerely hope not. Neoliberalism has given us this system of concentrated wealth (and power) in the hands of a few to a greater degree than has been experienced since the Gilded Age, some would go so far as to say the Middle Ages in Europe. The reality is that I do think capitalism as we know/knew it is gone--essentially morphed into corporatism--which in many ways is even worse. Large economic institutions control the economy for the benefit of the few. That is one reason why I favor worker and community ownership of most economic entities, especially those over a certain size. I hope the Forward Party can offer something beyond retreads of the last two centuries which merely cement self-anointed elites in control.
Redesign the Government into Regions of the Country independent of a Central Government Buercracary Control system, that would be the Mature Way Forward, of course that entails letting People live there Lives independent from Experts, does that level of Maturity Exist anywhere? Michael Malice would be a Fantastic Guest, okay the British assault on Washington during the War of 1812 is not What J6 was no matter how much Spin Propaganda is interjected
This "poor design" theory (we have to change the epectoral process) is hard to sell to many people. People who wins in this "poor design" will mostlikely support the system. The people who loses in this "poor design" will be told that because they lost is the reason they advocate to change the "poor design" As a stop gap that incentivize change, (question for a future podcast) is implementing a rule that would invalidate an election if less than 50% of registered voters do not vote??? This rule will force candidates to reach out to most people and get them out to vote rather than pacifying their base. The unintended result of this rule will make an election a holiday rather than a ramdom Tuesday in November where no one has time off...
@@chickenfishhybrid44Voting as a major event like Thanksgiving (or any other holiday) puts a value in our democracy process. I'm learning more that our government and society cares less about elections when people struggle to vote. Most of the working class can't take time off of work in a random Tuesday in November. Most working class have used up that time or saved it for the holidays... Why vote when it's inconvenient. Invalidating an election if less than 50% of registered voters vote incentivize politicians to have a broader based and get people excited to vote at the same time. This is a winning strategy for the future of the US democracy experiment...
RUclipsr Peter Santenello does something similar! Travels around learning about real American communities and subcultures in a curious non-judgmental way.
Peter Santenello would be awesome in this podcast.
RCV will be here in Nevada soon... Fingers crossed!
I appreciate your consistence!
You never disappoint!
Another great one!
I just blinked.
First. 🙌🏼
R FK jr 1:33
I think the "Forward" party is a good name, but I think a better name would be the "American Capitalism" party. It would neutralize the most common epithet used against the movement. (That being that it is "communist" when it is actually the exact opposite of communist--getting wealth and power to individuals from the state.)
🤷
In many ways terms like capitalism and socialism are last century terms. The definitions of both are skewed and both have essentially lost most of their meaning. We really don't have a capitalist society as originally envisioned in the 19th and early 20th centuries. We have a corporatist system with vestiges of capitalist markets. It would be wrong to call it socialist because socialisms vary with some believing in centralized decision-making through the government in the name of the "people", but that experience has left a sour taste in most people's mouths, even among socialists (think the Soviet experience), while others are looking at different models. One possibility the Forward Party might explore is to advocate to "democratize" capital as a goal to serve as a check on the rise of AI/AGI as humans are slowly replaced as producers in the economy. If capital accounts for all (considered a conservative worker capitalism idea) were married to decentralized community ownership and coordination of local economic growth encouraging worker owned firms (considered a decentralist socialist idea) as part of that process, you achieve what socialists have been clamoring for for more than a century, yet you still have local control, functioning "capitalist"--if the term must be used--markets, and a freer society with broad-based ownership. It ain't traditional capitalism and it ain't traditional socialism, but it might be the next system. The democratization of capital also puts humans in charge of how, when, where and how much, AI/AGI can produce and how it is deployed going beyond a few senior managers in far away offices making world altering decisions with no real accountability beyond a narrow band of shareholders. There was a political economist some years ago advocating something like this and he would ask his audience: if you don't like corporate capitalism and you don't like state socialism, what do you want?
@@gregorysouthworth783 I would say that Andrew Yang already named this type of economy. Human-centered capitalism is what he used ushered by UBI where no one is left behind!
Since the days of Reagan's supply side economics where corporations are bailed out because it's "too big to fail" mantra shift to Demand side economics where no one is left behind.
All in all, humanity first regardless of names is used!
Now people know that forward stands for neoliberalism. Now matter how u reform capitalism it’s still a exploited system
@@matsal3211 I sincerely hope not. Neoliberalism has given us this system of concentrated wealth (and power) in the hands of a few to a greater degree than has been experienced since the Gilded Age, some would go so far as to say the Middle Ages in Europe. The reality is that I do think capitalism as we know/knew it is gone--essentially morphed into corporatism--which in many ways is even worse. Large economic institutions control the economy for the benefit of the few. That is one reason why I favor worker and community ownership of most economic entities, especially those over a certain size. I hope the Forward Party can offer something beyond retreads of the last two centuries which merely cement self-anointed elites in control.
Redesign the Government into Regions of the Country independent of a Central Government Buercracary Control system, that would be the Mature Way Forward, of course that entails letting People live there Lives independent from Experts, does that level of Maturity Exist anywhere? Michael Malice would be a Fantastic Guest, okay the British assault on Washington during the War of 1812 is not What J6 was no matter how much Spin Propaganda is interjected
This "poor design" theory (we have to change the epectoral process) is hard to sell to many people.
People who wins in this "poor design" will mostlikely support the system. The people who loses in this "poor design" will be told that because they lost is the reason they advocate to change the "poor design"
As a stop gap that incentivize change, (question for a future podcast) is implementing a rule that would invalidate an election if less than 50% of registered voters do not vote???
This rule will force candidates to reach out to most people and get them out to vote rather than pacifying their base.
The unintended result of this rule will make an election a holiday rather than a ramdom Tuesday in November where no one has time off...
Having time to vote is increasingly irrelevant with mail in voting.
@@chickenfishhybrid44Voting as a major event like Thanksgiving (or any other holiday) puts a value in our democracy process. I'm learning more that our government and society cares less about elections when people struggle to vote. Most of the working class can't take time off of work in a random Tuesday in November. Most working class have used up that time or saved it for the holidays... Why vote when it's inconvenient.
Invalidating an election if less than 50% of registered voters vote incentivize politicians to have a broader based and get people excited to vote at the same time. This is a winning strategy for the future of the US democracy experiment...