It appears that ONE crux-point of the issue is that HUMANS, by NATURE of their cultural nature (which, of course, does NOT exclude the cultural nature of NON-humans) AUTOMATICALLY create the "organic" institution called "government" which arises NATURALLY out of being alive. Hence, the fact that humans in more "primitive" societies, and/or those which has "fallen back" to a primitvie state through destructive processes such as war, natural disaster, etc. STILL naturally create social structures which are essentially GOVERNMENT-LIKE. The whole idea of the "nasty, brutish" existence of Thojmas Hobbes actually APPEARS to not be so accurate, as even under the WORST conditions, human tend to organize themselves into small groups with a BASIC social organization which can be called "government". This begs the question, could the ONLY "more effective" solution to the "inherent government" conundrum be the need for NON-human automation (for instance, in the form of various applications of blockchain technology - ex. the recent blockchain voting trial conducted in West Virginia : https://cointelegraph.com/news/us-west-virginia-completes-first-blockchain-supported-state-elections ) to be implemented as a SAFEGUARD? I believe such a solution IS viable, and BETTER than the current solutions - or LACK of them - which we currently have. It's an interesting question - and one which I am SURE that the GROWING number of "Mixed Mental Artists" here on Steemit (such as : @michaelgarfield ) can definitely add some JUICY GEMS of philosophical speculation to ...
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
In many regards, the numerous more advanced applications of blockchain will provide a significant remedy to these types of issues. For instance, one relevant recent example is the new effort by IBM and various high-level NGOs to apply blockchain technology to the charity (and aid) industries : https://cointelegraph.com/news/ibm-and-ngo-global-citizen-announce-contest-for-blockchain-charity-platform One of the notorious problems in the charity/aid/development industries is corruption/negligence which results in funds not getting to where they are supposed to (often into the pockets of corrupt politicians and criminals, instead of the people who most need the aid. Applying the non-human, transparent blockchain technology to this use case will make almost surely make a significant improvement throughout every level of the supply chain in this specific industry - and this is just one use case.
Decentralize everything. Power certainly should be. Control should be as well. The more we reverse the centralization of power over others, the more individual liberty we will have. This is one reason I strongly support decentralized platforms such as steemit and crypto in general. Kill the beast by a thousand cuts to its roots!
The more local and small the governance is, the better off people are. Let's agree on some basic definitions though first please.
Government, as defined by me at least, is not governance. Government implies monopolies, double standards, and special protections. Humans do not seek those things and never would if they were properly informed. Therefore, I'm all for governance, leadership, and organization by humans. We'll always have those things.
What I don't want and reject is rulers. Rulers have those special protections and double standards. They have monopolies too. As humans we should be equal under the law, and the law should be simple and based on damage done to property and harm done to humans. You would also have contract law (keeping your word).
I agree with the general idea of non-rulership. However, on a philosophical level 9and through life experience) I find it a bit difficult to conceptualize a state void of rulers. I don't mean in the sense of formal rulers (ex. monarchy, technocrats, etc.) I mean that human nature is such that SOME people REQUIRE a certain degree of "rulership" - not so much in the NEGATIVE sense of the term, but in the practical one. For instance, disabled people (depending on the nature of the disability) often NEED other people to "rule" over them - or perhaps "manage" basic tasks in their lives. Also think of the whole "power of attorney" concept. If there was no "rulership" for these people they would be WORSE OFF. In other words, I believe that the natural state of human nature is one of INEQUALITY. However, I DO agree with you that corrupted human POWER is major factor in the problem, and object to it as well. This is why I am arguing that technologies like blockchain - which TAKE OUT a significant amount of the corruptable human factor are a step forward in SIGNIFICANTLY MINIMIZING the destructive results of corruted human power abuse.
Disabled people don't have people assisting them forced upon them. If they don't want the help, they don't have to have it. They are not harming me by taking that help either unless I'm being forced to pay for it.
Signing over your rights to another is a voluntary action. Setting up a living will is too.
There will always be leaders for our species. I have no problem with leaders. They should not be protected by double standards and should be equal to me under the law. That's all I'm really asking for. When they are not, that is what makes them a ruler and not a leader. :)
I'm talking about VERY disabled people, who are so disabled that they CAN'T take care of themselves. You know that those type of people exist right? If not, then there is no need to continue the dialogue...
You think those people were simply left to die in the past? They were not. People voluntarily took care of them.