Mastodon Politics Show more
Mastodon Politics Show more
Mastodon Politics Show more
Mastodon Politics Show more
Mastodon Politics Show more
Mastodon Politics Show more
@bob @fallerOfFalls The counterpoint to that, is that when there are no rules then the weakest suffer.
Having a hierarchy isn't always a bad thing. Having rules isn't always a bad thing. Even having a benevolent dictator can be a great solution, as long as it lasts.
Extremes tend to be wrong, no matter which direction they take.
@bob @fallerOfFalls Trouble is assured either way.
Your "no rulers" utopia has no provisions to deal with assholes, let alone mobs of assholes who mobilise of their own volition to mistreat other people.
As soon as people start working together - whether on defense or offense or just creative projects, you get hierarchies and rulers, defacto or otherwise.
That's humanity.
@bob @fallerOfFalls Now we're getting pretty philosophical, but I'd like to point out that these large bureaucratic structures aren't pure evil.
They're the reason we're not mostly dead of measles, the reason we have CPUs with billions of transistors and the reasons violent crime is probably at its lowest point in all of recorded history.
Just sayin'. Working together, at scale, does have a few advantages. ๐
@HerraBRE @bob @fallerOfFalls Iron Law of Oligarchy, Robert Michelss, "Political Parties", 1911.
When you apply the small scale psychology to large cities or nations then it becomes dysfunctional. The attempt to work around this is to invent bureaucratic structures and recruit police forces to ensure that rules are followed, but all that really does is create a privileged class who lord it over the rest. This kind of dynamic is why many of use stayed out of the silos to begin with.