(JAY:)
These "egalitarian" societies work because they are small. Community
members must be able to "recognize" other community memebers.
That limits them to 300 or 400 individuals.
me:
If everyone have information about the trackrecord of
somebody's capabilities in a directly any time
open information system, we do not need to "recognize"
community members in the larger community.
And in the smaller one - such as living place and workplace
control, such choosing people relying on personal
experience is more efficient
than the present system where the supervisors are
pushed on from the top.
By the way, I would call a hierarchy democracy, if it
is built bottom-up, everyone is instantly recallable
and everyone have the same access to information and
life's necessities. Besides not being based on
physical strength and darwinism, it seems a very
natural social way to me, too...
Ray:
It not a question wheither or not human will have rulers, the only question
is who shall rule. We are presently ruled by the rich. I would like to see
different criteria.
It's a fact of life that democracy (no matter how one defines it) is on the
way out.
me: it cannot be on the way out, as it hasn't been in yet!
We should be ruled by ourselves, that's the best way to
being ouselves; the most individualistic system there is...
Eva
