3 ms·
Almost every single group I've been part of had leaders. They may have been elected by the group, or more often, appointed elsewhere. The ones that don't have l
by goatlover 4y ago
Almost every single group I've been part of had leaders. They may have been elected by the group, or more often, appointed elsewhere. The ones that don't have leadership tend to be temporary and disorganized. In situations where this is less temporary, leaders often emerge naturally, as that's how humans typically organize themselves.
We have conscious choice, sure, but that doesn't change the fact that we're part of larger systems that we only have some influence over. It also doesn't change the fact that conscious choice is somewhat biologically driven.
- moloch-hai 4y agoHow many of these groups were of people who did not grow up with fixed hierarchies, and so had developed organizational skills that did not rely on one? A hierarchy is the laziest choice among ways to organize.
- fckgnad 4y agoHierarchies are places where one relies on many. That is the point of a hierarchy... so that a few can control and rely on many. It is the most unfair way to organize.
- moloch-hai 4y agoIt is thus very, very convenient for the few that people are conditioned from childhood to believe it is the only way to organize, and announce it freely in print.
- fckgnad 4y agoA child is well aware of the parent-child hierarchy that is more or less universal across all modern cultures. You've been conditioned by this book to follow a fringe belief.
- moloch-hai 4y ago[flagged]
- mcswell 4y agoFirst, I suspect that every group you've been part of has been composed of mostly or entirely white people around your age who speak English. The contention of the book, and from what I understand that of many anthropologists and archaeologists, is that this is atypical, or at least not all that typical. Also, the book makes a point about ephemeral leadership, either leadership (and the corresponding organization) that is seasonal according to the needs of the time of year, or temporary for a particular task (house building, field clearing, hunting...). Which may be what you're saying in the first paragraph about temporary groups, but they're saying this is the normal--or even only--situation in some cultures, and that furthermore it works just fine. As for biologically driven choices, I suspect the authors would say that the range of choices is far greater than you might think.
- goatlover 4y agoOnly English speaking white people tend to be hierarchal? What BS is that? Have you ever been to Asia (or most of Europe)? You think Africans, Middle Easterners or South Americans don't have hierarchies? You think only white people tend to select leaders in groups without one? That's ridiculous and simply wrong. And civilization didn't begin in Europe anyway, it was the Middle East, and then cropped up in five or six separate locations across the globe, including the Americas.
- moloch-hai 4y ago> Only English speaking white people tend to be hierarchal? No. But all your experience in the world is in hierarchies. You have no relevant experience to draw on.
- goatlover 4y agoThat would apply to the large majority of the people on this planet for the past few thousand years.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]