3 ms·
> "the same laws, save for the means of changing them". > The only freedom that's really lost in my AI-dictated society is the freedom to determine the rules a
by mabub24 9y ago
> "the same laws, save for the means of changing them".
> The only freedom that's really lost in my AI-dictated society is the freedom to determine the rules and on an individual level, I don't think that's meaningful. At an individual level, I already cannot realistically change the rules, so losing that technicality makes me no less free.
But the loss of the individual freedom to determine the rules is also the loss of freedom for a society to determine the rules for itself. That is profoundly meaningful. Every dystopian narrative in modern history has been about that point. "Perfect" societies are as artificial as "rightful" dictators. Freedom without democracy is, from the view of a democracy, not freedom at all.
> You keep bringing democracy in where I don't believe it belongs. I'm talking about freedom, not democracy.
I disagree, I'm saying they are the same thing. A democracy expresses our freedom and our freedom is expressed through our democracy. They cannot be separated. I think that is our main disagreement.
> A person living under the right dictator would have more freedom than one living under the wrong (but still valid) democracy, being freed from the burden of governance.
Governance is not a burden. This is why I say devaluing freedom is devaluing democracy. And why the "right" dictator is still a dictator, and therefore they cannot but perpetuate a less free system. Our democracies are a system that allows us to trust a representative from society to project our mandate, to express our will, amongst others with mutual trust placed in them. If they do not, then we can vote them out. It is not a burden to vote or to take part in politics. On the contrary, it is a singular symbol of our freedoms. That does not mean democracies are perfect. Lord knows they are not. But, democracies are the best we have. It's not an add-on, we either have it or we are less free.
- Veratyr 9y ago> But the loss of the individual freedom to determine the rules is also the loss of freedom for a society to determine the rules for itself. Freedom of society and freedom of the individual are two different things and a society can have different levels of both. Say you have a democratic wolf and sheep society, where wolves are the majority and treat the sheep as a lower class, treat them horribly and basically just farm them for food. As a wolf in a this society governed by wolves, you may feel quite free, because your wishes are reflected by many and the changes you aim for tend to happen. How though, would you feel as a sheep? Technically you have the same individual freedom as a wolf but at a societal level, you are powerless. You live a terrible life and there's nothing you can do about it because of the very democratic system that's intended to ensure your freedom. I believe the sheep would be more free in a benevolent dictatorship. A dictator could give the sheep green grass, sunshine, freedom from being eaten, freedom to live a long and happy life and much more. All it would take is giving up the ultimately useless theoretical ability to participate in democracy. The wolves could be too, perhaps they could eat chickens or somesuch. > Governance is not a burden. [...] It is not a burden to vote or to take part in politics. To some, it is. Democracy places responsibility on all its participants and being relieved of that responsibility is a form of freedom. In a dictatorial society, I have the freedom to spend time I'd spend participating in the democratic process doing other things. If the dictator makes a bad decision, I am in no way responsible for it.