There is no democraty if the people don't exercice their power. Voting once for a group of people make it one day democraty, the rest of the year oligarchy.
There is litterally no other way to have a democraty that to make your day to day actions matter. Each citizen has to have a life directed to create a society.
Now I understand how hard it is. And I don't blame people for failing at it, me included. But as long as we label it as unrealistic, it stops all hope of progress.
This kind of assumption (that you must optimize your behavior for common good) is unrealistic. Only "good people" will do so, and that caring will put them at a competitive disadvantage compared to people who simply don't care.
No, regulation has the possibility of leveling the playing field and making everyone behave in a certain way, irrespective of how good or bad they are.
> Only "good people" will do so, and that caring will put them at a competitive disadvantage compared to people who simply don't care.
That's always the case. If you recycle, you are at a competitive disadvantaged compared to people who don't care. If you are veggie as well. Or if you help your kids to do their homework.
Do you think it's unreasonable to promote recycling ?
It's not a binary choice, it's a spectrum anyway.
> No, regulation has the possibility of leveling the playing field and making everyone behave in a certain way, irrespective of how good or bad they are.
Regulations are very slow, subject to intense lobbying and conflicts of interest, and assume people in charge are benevolent and compentent.
Regulations are not the base of the society. They come, they go. They change according to the time, the context, the place... People are what's matter.
Again, I understand how hard this is. I also notice that a lot of people don't want to hear about it, because of the resonsibility it involves. But power to the people cannot comes without responsability to the people.
And responsability only truely work if it's chosen, not enforced.
It's unreasonable to expect that promoting recycling alone leads to systematic recycling of non-precious materials. Recycling is the law in places where it is considered commonplace.
Swedes don't just love recycling; the government makes it worthwhile by increasing the cost of not-recycling (fines, jail time).
True. This thread convinced me both bottom to top and top to bottom is necessary. But I do think that ignoring bottom to top leads to temporary fixes, or illusions.
Nope, what you are describing is capitalism, not democracy. Unfortunately we are so deep into the game now that it's had to imagine a world without it. I understand that it's hard, but try to imagine a world where workers can demand a living wage and not have to rely on the generosity of "good people" for the right to live.
I don't see any link between what I said and capitalism. Thinking of the policical and societal impact of your day to day actions does not only largely go beyong economy, but also doesn't assume the nature of the economic system you are in.
The instacart topic is just an example. An example saying, "if your economic system is currently capitalistic, and based on money, then voting with your wallet makes sense".
> I understand that it's hard, but try to imagine
That's so condescending.
> a world where workers can demand a living wage and not have to rely on the generosity of "good people" for the right to live.
Life is not binary, you can work on both. But your solution delegate the action to a small 3rd party, so it's still an oligarchy.
There is litterally no other way to have a democraty that to make your day to day actions matter. Each citizen has to have a life directed to create a society.
Now I understand how hard it is. And I don't blame people for failing at it, me included. But as long as we label it as unrealistic, it stops all hope of progress.