You're talking about some big ideas. We have failed because we let greed (and not just financial) get out of control. The people at the top are absent of morals, which likely made their ascent that much easier. We've let them dumb us down. We've let them poison us. We've let them tell us *how* to think. We've let them rewrite history. It's been this way far longer than we've even been around, so we have to unlearn so much and then teach ourselves what is actually going on. It's hard to get others to reexamine things. There is a lot of resistance! Contrary to popular belief, anarchism is the only way this doesn't turn into disastrous chaos, but I often feel like this world goes through cycles of exactly that because people never figure it out until it's too late.
I see no evidence anywhere in nature that it can or will change, that's why AI is basically my only hope left long term expressly because it's unnatural and recursive. Anarchy is exactly what we have now: Zero checks on power.
Because then you'd have a government. I'll never understand the doublethink required to set rules for an anarchy. You either have a system of governance or you don't. The lack of one is an anarchy, the presence of one is a government. There are no other options. Anarchy with rules is like dehydrated water. And yes, wild card, that's the reason it gives me hope.
People act like that but I am perpetually mystified by it. To me by definition rules for the group decided by the group and enforced by anyone define government. Like, if a corporation owned a planet their bylaws would be laws. People saying you can have a social organizing principal without government to me is like saying you can have an atmosphere without fluids. It by my lights is an axiomatic contradiction. It seems to me that people who think t hat way view government as an aesthetic rather than something with a functional definition. Like they "know it when they see it." To me that's just like saying anything I like is anarchy and anything I don't is government. Seriously if you can clear that up in a way a 5 year old autistic can understand I'm all ears. To me a power vacuum is identical to an anarchy. Even the choice to not have central authority is a government imo. The choice to not choose is still a choice. Bald is still a hairstyle if not a hair color :)
You’re an absorbing verbose person!
You're talking about some big ideas. We have failed because we let greed (and not just financial) get out of control. The people at the top are absent of morals, which likely made their ascent that much easier. We've let them dumb us down. We've let them poison us. We've let them tell us *how* to think. We've let them rewrite history. It's been this way far longer than we've even been around, so we have to unlearn so much and then teach ourselves what is actually going on. It's hard to get others to reexamine things. There is a lot of resistance! Contrary to popular belief, anarchism is the only way this doesn't turn into disastrous chaos, but I often feel like this world goes through cycles of exactly that because people never figure it out until it's too late.
I see no evidence anywhere in nature that it can or will change, that's why AI is basically my only hope left long term expressly because it's unnatural and recursive. Anarchy is exactly what we have now: Zero checks on power.
AI is a wild card.
I don't see why anarchy can't have checks on power.
Because then you'd have a government. I'll never understand the doublethink required to set rules for an anarchy. You either have a system of governance or you don't. The lack of one is an anarchy, the presence of one is a government. There are no other options. Anarchy with rules is like dehydrated water. And yes, wild card, that's the reason it gives me hope.
I don't think anarchy means you exist without policing.
People act like that but I am perpetually mystified by it. To me by definition rules for the group decided by the group and enforced by anyone define government. Like, if a corporation owned a planet their bylaws would be laws. People saying you can have a social organizing principal without government to me is like saying you can have an atmosphere without fluids. It by my lights is an axiomatic contradiction. It seems to me that people who think t hat way view government as an aesthetic rather than something with a functional definition. Like they "know it when they see it." To me that's just like saying anything I like is anarchy and anything I don't is government. Seriously if you can clear that up in a way a 5 year old autistic can understand I'm all ears. To me a power vacuum is identical to an anarchy. Even the choice to not have central authority is a government imo. The choice to not choose is still a choice. Bald is still a hairstyle if not a hair color :)