889
Debating the right to exist
(lemmy.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2025
889 points (100.0% liked)
Memes
53454 readers
585 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
Doubt. Please explain, possibly with examples; practices incidents etc.
It's not immune. It's not 'just as vulnerable'. You have to compromise a lot more stuff to fuck a decentralized system. If you've ever read cop doctrine; even they know this. They really love finding leaders; makes their jobs so much easier.
A quick example is local government vs regional government. Local governments do not have the same focus at a regional level that regional governments would over several local governments, while regional governments do not have the same view local governments would in detail.
As for decentralization being just as vulnerable, I mean that in the sense that fractured systems are easier to pit against itself. The US is a two party dictatorship, and is incredibly corrupt because of it.
Okay i think I can safely stop taking you seriously here
Not a bug, working as intended (posadism looking real good about now)
Um... So, wow, have you watched the news in the past decade?
Again, you're thinking in the paradigm of what is and pretending you can understand everything, thinking a more abstracted perspective should necessarily corellate with authority, and thinking perspective and authority should be both bundled and personalized.
Edit: you're also not explaining how this actually helps with anything. What's your area of expertise?
Why would me giving an example of decentralization leading to corruption not be deserving of being taken seriously? The US uses its decentralized structure for corruption, as it does use centralized structures. My point isn't that both are bad, but that both have proper and improper use-cases.
As for perspective vs authority, I'm well aware that one can see without having any power to change anything. I also know that that can become remarkably inefficient and result in catastrophe. We can make hierarchies accountable, democratic, etc, but the fact remains that they exist because of their utility and often necessity. Simply imagining a system devoid of hierarchy and trying to theorycraft it doesn't actually mean it will function in real life.
Okay we clearly have different definitions of words. Have you ever actually been here?
To the US? Yes, I live here. Having a 2 party system is more decentralized than a one party system. Centralization is a spectrum, not a binary.
Where's the second one?
DNC and GOP. They are united in that they both support capital, but are pit against each other to divide the working class. It's an example of theatrics, and the disunity of the system to prevent real systemic change. Same with how separation of powers is used.
Decentralization and centralization can both be used for good and for bad, and both have use-cases.
Okay what's the second one?
Repeating myself:
I also explained how separation of powers in the US is used as a fulcrum for corruption as well.
Not a bug, working as intended.
I agree, it is intended! It's also an example of decentralization presenting new opportunity for corruption.
Yes, very decentralized.
Not very, but you asked for an example and I gave several.
You gave one that isn't and one that was so broad and nonspecific it was just a restatement of the idea, because you can't separate concept from reality. I'm no longer interested in discussing politics with you; you have lost my respect.
I gave perfectly valid examples. When you fragment something, it can be pit against itself. This can be taken advantage of from the outside. At a smaller scale, let's say you had a union, and had a council instead of a single leader. Said council can devolve into factionalism and splitting, something that has happened in numerous other organizations, and this can be influenced from the outside.
Done means done, no means no, and I am done engaging woth you on serious topics, because you are not a serious person.
I'm plenty serious, but if you don't want a convo that's your choice.
Your mom is plenty serious!