The California Governor, in the launch of his new podcast, announced that he completely aligned with far-right, anti-LGBTQ+ influencer Charlie Kirk on sports, and agreed on prisons and youth care.
It keeps the bad opinions out while keeping flexibility when it comes to socialist policies and allows proper discussions relating how to manage a socialist economy, workers rights, and social laws, etc.
I personally recommend a system where there are multi candidate elections but all candidates have to be part of the same party. This will essentially turn the socialist party into a big tent party albeit the party will have the single goal of progressing towards socialism. Factions in the party will essentially act as a miniature parliament as factions could also create coalitions between each other.
There are two times this happened.
The Early USSR before Stalin took power with there being the right wing of the party who advocated for a market socialist economy and the continuation of voluntary collectivization, the center wing of the party (Stalin’s faction) who advocated for a centrally planned economy and forced collectivization, and finally the left wing of the party who were Trotskyists. There was nothing necessarily wrong with system except that Stalin was given a position which had too much power. The position of General Secretary was too powerful to exist in any democratic government and allowed him to destroy the separation of powers between the different factions (similar to what Trump is doing).
Late USSR under Gorbachev who allowed multi candidate elections albeit almost all candidates had to be party of the CPSU but failed because of the deterioration of the authority of the CPSU caused by the August Coup which strengthened the authority of the government of the RSFSR which was controlled by Yeltsin and friends who destroyed the USSR in support for Russian nationalism (they didn’t want Russia to subsidize its poorer republics and wanted Russia out of the CPSU/Soviet government’s authority).
We need a new system of government.
How about one party, the Communist Party USA and multiple opinions.
You lost this anarchist at “central authority”
To each their own.
You say that, but it’s not “to each his own” under one party rule. It’s “even fewer means to express dissent and curb corruption.”
It keeps the bad opinions out while keeping flexibility when it comes to socialist policies and allows proper discussions relating how to manage a socialist economy, workers rights, and social laws, etc.
How does it work in practice?
I personally recommend a system where there are multi candidate elections but all candidates have to be part of the same party. This will essentially turn the socialist party into a big tent party albeit the party will have the single goal of progressing towards socialism. Factions in the party will essentially act as a miniature parliament as factions could also create coalitions between each other.
There are two times this happened.
The Early USSR before Stalin took power with there being the right wing of the party who advocated for a market socialist economy and the continuation of voluntary collectivization, the center wing of the party (Stalin’s faction) who advocated for a centrally planned economy and forced collectivization, and finally the left wing of the party who were Trotskyists. There was nothing necessarily wrong with system except that Stalin was given a position which had too much power. The position of General Secretary was too powerful to exist in any democratic government and allowed him to destroy the separation of powers between the different factions (similar to what Trump is doing).
Late USSR under Gorbachev who allowed multi candidate elections albeit almost all candidates had to be party of the CPSU but failed because of the deterioration of the authority of the CPSU caused by the August Coup which strengthened the authority of the government of the RSFSR which was controlled by Yeltsin and friends who destroyed the USSR in support for Russian nationalism (they didn’t want Russia to subsidize its poorer republics and wanted Russia out of the CPSU/Soviet government’s authority).
So not a great track record. Ideals to Trumpism much faster than two party US democracy.