So what is the solution short of a complete US revolution which will have hundreds of thousands if not millions killed and hoping that everyone will come out socialists, anarchists and communists on the other side?
I do not disagree that the country SHOULD be socialist, anarchist and/or communist. I do not see that happening anytime soon unless an actual civil war breaks out.
implementation of my proposal would still require a minor revolution as the current system will not allow to elect a legislator that will pass these points:
Designate any newspaper, TV/YouTube/telegram channel, blog, Instagram account, etc with more than a 100k monthly views/impressions/followers/whatever as a public faced media.
Make the only allowed ownership form of these media outlets something like worker cooperatives.
Somewhat limit the ownership stakes so that no single member of this cooperative can make all the decisions.
The cooperative should have public financial records so the anyone can see where the revenue comes from.
This still does not protect against a billionaire buying out everyone in the cooperative through donations via multiple shell companies, but it is an improvement.
What I like is that a large media holding can still exist under this scheme, but any corruption would be somewhat apparent.
I dont disagree with the idea. In fact I quite like it. As youve said though, it has flaws. We won’t ever have a perfect system and have to work with what were given. If i ever could, I would go for what youre proposing.
So what is the solution short of a complete US revolution which will have hundreds of thousands if not millions killed and hoping that everyone will come out socialists, anarchists and communists on the other side?
I do not disagree that the country SHOULD be socialist, anarchist and/or communist. I do not see that happening anytime soon unless an actual civil war breaks out.
implementation of my proposal would still require a minor revolution as the current system will not allow to elect a legislator that will pass these points:
This still does not protect against a billionaire buying out everyone in the cooperative through donations via multiple shell companies, but it is an improvement. What I like is that a large media holding can still exist under this scheme, but any corruption would be somewhat apparent.
also there is still a problem with foreign based media outlets, I don’t have a way to deal with them at this point
I dont disagree with the idea. In fact I quite like it. As youve said though, it has flaws. We won’t ever have a perfect system and have to work with what were given. If i ever could, I would go for what youre proposing.