5 ms·

"Are you suggesting a leaderless society cannot exist or merely that it is hard to achieve?" At the end of the day, someone has to be the one to make the call

• ZenoArrow 11y ago
  That can happen democratically, you don't need to give the final say to a single individual or small group.
  • Kalium 11y ago
    Now you're implicitly allotting power to those with the charisma and reach to sway others while simultaneously introducing all the problems of the tyranny of the majority. In your efforts to try to fix bugs, you are re-introducing older bugs. Have you considered that a rewrite from scratch may not be ideal here, given how hard it is to get a functioning system?
    • ZenoArrow 11y ago
      Explain what makes democracy incompatible with communism. Also, note that the tyranny of the majority only applies if and when force is applied. Being in a minority is not necessarily problematic.
      • Kalium 11y ago
        > Now you're implicitly allotting power to those with the charisma and reach to sway others Here is the explanation you seek, friend. You are implicitly re-creating a leading class. The problem only appears solved because the class is implicit instead of explicit. And historically, you've probably killed a couple million people by now.
        • ZenoArrow 11y ago
          > "Now you're implicitly allotting power to those with the charisma and reach to sway others" Persuasion is far more palatable than physical force. Furthermore, in a direct democracy, those with charisma still do not make the final decision, all decisions go to a vote. If an individual proves influential, then they have a level of power, but opinions that serve the influential individual at the expense of their audience are not likely to gain traction.
          • Kalium 11y ago
            And incidentally, your classless utopia has a new crop of "influencers" (read: leadership-class) with disproportionate power. With no structures in place to restrain them but other members of the leadership-class with disproportionate power. That really only ends two ways - warring warlords or the leadership class unifying into an oligarchy. Oh, and you've overlooked how readily people are led into supporting positions directly contrary to their interests. It happens all the time. Tribal social structures and group identities make it easy and common. Nothing about this ends well. Have a nice day.
            • ZenoArrow 11y ago
              > "And incidentally, your classless utopia has a new crop of "influencers" (read: leadership-class) with disproportionate power. With no structures in place to restrain them but other members of the leadership-class with disproportionate power. That really only ends two ways - warring warlords or the leadership class unifying into an oligarchy." The power of the "influencers" depends on the education level of the general population, does it not? > "Oh, and you've overlooked how readily people are led into supporting positions directly contrary to their interests. It happens all the time. Tribal social structures and group identities make it easy and common." As I've said to you before in an earlier comment, it'll take time to undo our earlier programming, to make us less prone to follow hierarchical structures (and to think with a mob mentality). The education to enable this can start today, we don't need to change our society in order to start changing ourselves.
              • Kalium 11y ago
      • s73v3r 11y ago
        Democracy implies there is a leading class.
        • ZenoArrow 11y ago
          How so? Perhaps you're thinking of a representative democracy. I'm referring to direct democracy.