• const void*@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why shouldn’t the state be subject to the same whims as its citizens? How else will the state have skin in the game?

    To me, the free market has produced both Lemmy and Mastodon - I wouldn’t count it out just yet.

    • blue_zephyr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      So Lemmy and Mastodon instances are free market solutions, unless a government does it? I don’t even understand what your point is.

      • const void*@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        For media, a state platform in order of goodness:

        non state (open) platform > non state (closed) platform > State owned platform

        most times when the state takes an action it deprives it’s citizens of the beneficial outcomes of that action (skill, monetary).

        Which would be better - open instances in each country where the state ( country and regional/s) is a participant along with its citizens?

        Or instances where the state and its infinite power is private and above the people the state would govern?

        My reaction is not to a state using mastodon nor twitter for that matter. My reaction is to a state running mastodon separate from the people.