At the core of it all is that real solutions take more thought and work than most will commit.

@CynicalSpaceMan That is the polarizing viewpoint that has created this totally dysfunctional gridlock. There are things that only government can do, or does more effectively. Historically the postal service linked us, public education that we pioneered built a more educated work force, government incentives built a transcontinental railway system and interstate highway system, found the cures for major public health issues like polio, malaria, measles.

The solution is not the idyllic myth of the lone range rider taking care of himself, occasionally lending a hand in a community barn raising. The solution is finding a happy medium where government does what it can do better than individuals or private firms guided solely by bottom line profits. And that includes providing some base line safety nets for people, enabling them to devote more attention and time to just bare subsistence. And the Netherlands is not the only example of where it has shown to work: the Scandinavian countries, Australia & New Zealand, Canada to mention a few.

But to do so requires taking a step back from this ideological labeling, name calling, and finger pointing to listen and work together on workable solutions, not my way or the highway. Because both highways are barely navigable anymore due to neglect, if you haven't noticed.

@dancingtongue

I don’t disagree that governments have done important things at scale;

infrastructure, public health, education, national coordination.

Nor am I’m arguing for some lone-wolf myth or abolishing centralized systems altogether.

Where I differ is on dependency.

The issue isn’t that government exists or does useful things. It’s that nearly all essential needs:

housing
food
healthcare
energy
income

are structurally tied to centralized and hierarchical systems.

That creates leverage asymmetry. Even well-intentioned institutions tend to optimize for stability and self-preservation.

The government and market system has a monopoly on life itself. With that kind of power they simply have no incentive to improve anything.

What i propose is not about replacing government. It is about adding parallel, smaller-scale provisioning systems.

Co-ops, mutual aid, local food and housing models that operate lawfully and remain embedded in the broader society.

The goal isn’t secession. It’s resilience.

Large-scale coordination can coexist with decentralized structures. In fact, a mixed ecology is likely more stable than a monoculture of either pure centralization or pure market individualism.

So this isn’t “my way or the highway.” It’s adding side roads so neither highway has absolute control.

@CynicalSpaceMan
Agree, totally. Lived in a student-owned and student-run housing co-op when going to college, and volunteer a lot of time as well as money to it now as an alum. It provides room and board at half or less than university dorms do, or can. While teaching practical work skills and responsibilities that the dorms don't.

80% of the agriculture in California -- the biggest agriculture state -- is run by farm co-operatives.

Where government can do is help provide the incentives, the knowledge and stimulus for these type of communal efforts without people immediately screaming SOCIALISM.