This debate about how humans should govern themselves is the real battle of our time, both metaphorically and literally, both internationally and right here at home.
I propose a slightly different big picture regarding "authoritarians in nature." Citing lower animals like birds flying in unison is one thing, but as one goes up the evolutionary scale into more conscious carnivores, one sees the dominance of the alpha male wolf, the silver-backed male gorilla, and "The Lion King"...yeh? Yes, the dominant human social structure for the past 5,000 years has been with chiefs, kings, emperors, pharaohs, dictators, etc. controlling our societies. Only very recently has "democracy" become a reality (in the US) for any length of time. And, you correctly ask: Is democracy natural for humans? How long can democracy survive? Especially in the face of authoritarianism? I agree with MLKing: "The arc of history bends slowly toward justice" because I find that the core of human beings is primarily a sense of oneness, fairness, justice, and egalitarianism. Therefore we are in a struggle with ourselves to overcome our aggressive, selfish, power-addictive inclinations....with our more gentle, compassionate, empathic core seeking a more fair & just world that includes everyone (aka: NOT for "Whites Only"). So, yes, our human past has been predominantly authoritarian in nature, but looking at this matter from the evolutionary perspective, I conclude that "democracy" is on "the right side of history" as we continue to evolve into a higher consciousness of oneness that includes everyone and everything. But due to the very clever, dualistic universe that birthed us, we find ourselves in an uphill battle with the "dominators" of our species (& their "father-seeking" followers). As you continually remind us, Thom,--(Thank YOU!)--it's up to us : "Democracy is not a spectator sport....Get active ! Tag! You're IT !" (And "Despair is not an option!")
Fascinating! Check this out: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes-moral/ (Article in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Hobbes' Moral and Political Philosophy, revision 2018.) Lots of trouble getting scholarly heads around Hobbes: is he a nascent Objectivist? (Ayn Rand, I presume.) or the father of Game Theory? (Prisoner's dilemma.) I also have taken off the shelf Erich Fromm: "Escape from Freedom." (1941) Fromm particularly grappled with how psychology begets sociology. (cover blurb:"Totalitarianism can be tempting.") I would observe that the real "primal scream" may be: "Will somebody just tell me what to doooooo!" But what about the old aphorism about absolute power corrupting absolutely? Maybe America got lucky, in that the Trump incarnation of "Only I can solve it all" was so over-the-top vile and venal that enough of us are motivated to hold the fort against the next dictator, somehow. Thom warns us about the Trumps in velvet gloves waiting in the wings. It's clear now that we can't really do anything about the congenital Igors and Renfields in our midst. The armed. Possibilities turn inside out. Hobbes posits that "state of nature" is state of war, yet that the dictator and/or church is supposed to be what saves society from chaos and war, not what solicits it. Military coup is supposed to be bad, yet will the military be the last hope of democracy in our time?
I don't find Little Napoleon Putin and what he's doing to be a mystery. He is a psychopath with a couple of very obvious agendas. His ego wants what he deems is his. The people that may be hurt in getting it are nothing but objects to him. He also has a PR problem created by the truth; he is a THIEF. Navalny put it all out there for the world and HIS citizens to see. I'd say the second agenda is to stir-up some patriotism to deflect from what he has stolen from the Russian people.
Democracy in some form is the only answer to making progress. It's as logical as that old saying "two heads are better than one". What has been lost to the world by suppressing people, especially women? It's very depressing to think about. But, as the world moves forward, we cannot afford an authoritarian system or to lose any more human intelligence. We have to save our environment if we want to live.
Maintaining a democracy (actually a republican form of democracy) is hard work, Members of a democractic society should review and be conscious of the history, not only of democracy in general, but in the history of THEIR democracy. Citizens (That's many of us, folks!) need to participate. We need to attempt to support our local education and government efforts. This means attending meetings, telling people about upcoming el;ectionsment or disagreement, and so on. It means that sometimes people will not be respectful of us, even if we are respectful of them. All the editorials for "democracy" won't help if we aren't doing more than just griping about the other side.
The natural order is in fact what we call "democracy". And to be clear, I do not believe as a species we have ever truly practiced it (in modern history) - not even here in the "land of the free". We've had some good moments, some believable tales, and certainly many people working to push back on the unnatural state of rule-by-force. Modern human history is pockmarked by societal collapse. This should be an ear-shattering alarm that no, we are not living according to any natural order. The reason authoritarianism as governance will forever fail to produce stability is that the authoritarian mindset is one of self, of ego - exclusively interested in winning the moment, not producing long-term solutions.
Rutger Bregman's book, "Human Kindness" is a great testimony to our true nature as a species.
For now, we live in a virtual world imposed upon us by those on high - a world in which our ugliest tendencies are fostered, to keep us apart and empower the few.
I, think is time for you to re visit this argument Thom. We are going in the wrong direction right toward oligarchy. Thom, the traitors must go. This is bad for our country, Thom.
Humanity is advancing rapidly toward a future that is totally beyond our comprehension. Any attempt to lock that future to any historical past form is futile. History show us that what was necessary in the past happened to provide a temporary building block upon which to build the future. It is not wise to crucify ourselves on the alter of past ideologies, whose usefulness have been spent, and are waning. Our job is to transcend all of that without loosing any valued lessons. Humanity is fully capable of building a just and equitable future and is destined to do so. However, we need a fence to guide us around the swamp that will hinder our progress. The big question is what does that fence look like and how do we recognize it when appears. How it all unfolds is totally dependent on our individual decisions in conjunction with events in the physical world , including the present pandemic, that constrain us. By acting wisely, we will actively create the inevitable unimaginable future that is our destiny. We live in exciting and trying times .
A lot of the decision of oligarchy vs democracy revolves around whether people approach life’s decisions heavily weighed towards emotional attachment or analytical reflection. Usually, if a group of people believe that they want an authoritarian strongman to lead them, it most often arises out of an unthinking emotional attachment that they later regret when faced with the reality of having a psychopathic leader. The emotional attachment is so strong that it’s as if the individual’s adorations make them feel as if they and their “leader” are somehow spiritually tied together. It’s almost as if it’s a kind of mental stalking that makes the person feel that the autocratic leader is both a “man” who needs no other person, while living under the illusion that they can be almost friends (comrades?) against all others who may do them personal harm. They quickly find out that being governed oligarchically is only an advantage for the various leaders, but by that time they are often wishing - either outwardly (if they dare to) or inwardly with great regret - that they should’ve “got the Covid shot.” Folks that happily go about waving their guns have a surprise awaiting them and their authoritarian dreams when the supreme leader of any large population will never allow the people that they are ruling have free access to arms. If these idiots really think the Dems want to take away their guns, they’ll have a whole lot of sweating to do when their favorite despot becomes ruler.
A slightly different slant on an immensely complex subject
The birth of our nation happened amidst a worldwide the cacophony of wars, battles, and intrigues between nation states ruled by Kings and Ecclesiastics. The conviction of rule by Divine right, in which Kings and Ecclesiastics were not accountable to any earthly authority, was unassailable in most of the world. The events unfolding in North America were initially of minor importance but noticeable. The concept of rule by the people was truly revolutionary and clearly needed to be stopped, but contrary events unfolded that allowed it to grow against all odds. However, the conviction that rule by aristocracy with its underlying notion of Divine right has not been totally relegated to the dustbin of history, in fact it is reemerging in a last gasp effort to derail rule by the people. It has no lasting power behind it because it is attempting to take us backwards to a state of equilibrium that is impossible to resurrect.
Amongst the essential events in human history was the invention of the telegraph, which was formally introduced by Samuel Morse in 1844 when he sent the famous message “What hath God wrought” from Washington to Baltimore. With this message the worlds equilibrium was upset forever. Present day science and technology can be traced to that message which, in historical perspective, directly challenged the power of rule by Divine Right. In fact, the unenlightened of today seem to think of technology as the vehicle to rule by Divine Right.
The seeds planted in our new democracy in conjunction with technology, began to erode the divine power equilibrium of rule by bygone Kings and Ecclesiastes via loss of wars, their enormous fortunes, and revolutionary forces. Inevitably, the power and concepts inherited from the past are fading despite attempts by some to perpetuate them based on idle fancies and vain imaginings of what history tells us. However, the underlying concept is still with us.
The birth of a new equilibrium is not an easy process because past thought remains strong but slowly losing momentum. The main baggage in today’s incarnation of Divine Power is “I can do as I please because I have no earthly constraints”. The simplest form is the gunman who says” I did it because I could” where the gun provided the power. For people with great wealth and influence, they can do as they please “because they can”, because they have the resources.
It is of prime importance to understanding that while “not having earthly constraints” may appear to be true, Divine Will inevitably wins. This begs the question of who of us humans, past, present, and future have unfettered and infinitely pure access to Divine Will. There are many in the past, in the present, and in the future who claim that distinction. If all claims are false, then access to Divine Will is never available to humanity and why does the concept even exist. To allow the concept to exist and not provide access is the height of injustice. The mystery continues, until the true seeker finds the Beloved.
I propose a slightly different big picture regarding "authoritarians in nature." Citing lower animals like birds flying in unison is one thing, but as one goes up the evolutionary scale into more conscious carnivores, one sees the dominance of the alpha male wolf, the silver-backed male gorilla, and "The Lion King"...yeh? Yes, the dominant human social structure for the past 5,000 years has been with chiefs, kings, emperors, pharaohs, dictators, etc. controlling our societies. Only very recently has "democracy" become a reality (in the US) for any length of time. And, you correctly ask: Is democracy natural for humans? How long can democracy survive? Especially in the face of authoritarianism? I agree with MLKing: "The arc of history bends slowly toward justice" because I find that the core of human beings is primarily a sense of oneness, fairness, justice, and egalitarianism. Therefore we are in a struggle with ourselves to overcome our aggressive, selfish, power-addictive inclinations....with our more gentle, compassionate, empathic core seeking a more fair & just world that includes everyone (aka: NOT for "Whites Only"). So, yes, our human past has been predominantly authoritarian in nature, but looking at this matter from the evolutionary perspective, I conclude that "democracy" is on "the right side of history" as we continue to evolve into a higher consciousness of oneness that includes everyone and everything. But due to the very clever, dualistic universe that birthed us, we find ourselves in an uphill battle with the "dominators" of our species (& their "father-seeking" followers). As you continually remind us, Thom,--(Thank YOU!)--it's up to us : "Democracy is not a spectator sport....Get active ! Tag! You're IT !" (And "Despair is not an option!")
Fascinating! Check this out: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes-moral/ (Article in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Hobbes' Moral and Political Philosophy, revision 2018.) Lots of trouble getting scholarly heads around Hobbes: is he a nascent Objectivist? (Ayn Rand, I presume.) or the father of Game Theory? (Prisoner's dilemma.) I also have taken off the shelf Erich Fromm: "Escape from Freedom." (1941) Fromm particularly grappled with how psychology begets sociology. (cover blurb:"Totalitarianism can be tempting.") I would observe that the real "primal scream" may be: "Will somebody just tell me what to doooooo!" But what about the old aphorism about absolute power corrupting absolutely? Maybe America got lucky, in that the Trump incarnation of "Only I can solve it all" was so over-the-top vile and venal that enough of us are motivated to hold the fort against the next dictator, somehow. Thom warns us about the Trumps in velvet gloves waiting in the wings. It's clear now that we can't really do anything about the congenital Igors and Renfields in our midst. The armed. Possibilities turn inside out. Hobbes posits that "state of nature" is state of war, yet that the dictator and/or church is supposed to be what saves society from chaos and war, not what solicits it. Military coup is supposed to be bad, yet will the military be the last hope of democracy in our time?
I don't find Little Napoleon Putin and what he's doing to be a mystery. He is a psychopath with a couple of very obvious agendas. His ego wants what he deems is his. The people that may be hurt in getting it are nothing but objects to him. He also has a PR problem created by the truth; he is a THIEF. Navalny put it all out there for the world and HIS citizens to see. I'd say the second agenda is to stir-up some patriotism to deflect from what he has stolen from the Russian people.
Democracy in some form is the only answer to making progress. It's as logical as that old saying "two heads are better than one". What has been lost to the world by suppressing people, especially women? It's very depressing to think about. But, as the world moves forward, we cannot afford an authoritarian system or to lose any more human intelligence. We have to save our environment if we want to live.
Maintaining a democracy (actually a republican form of democracy) is hard work, Members of a democractic society should review and be conscious of the history, not only of democracy in general, but in the history of THEIR democracy. Citizens (That's many of us, folks!) need to participate. We need to attempt to support our local education and government efforts. This means attending meetings, telling people about upcoming el;ectionsment or disagreement, and so on. It means that sometimes people will not be respectful of us, even if we are respectful of them. All the editorials for "democracy" won't help if we aren't doing more than just griping about the other side.
The natural order is in fact what we call "democracy". And to be clear, I do not believe as a species we have ever truly practiced it (in modern history) - not even here in the "land of the free". We've had some good moments, some believable tales, and certainly many people working to push back on the unnatural state of rule-by-force. Modern human history is pockmarked by societal collapse. This should be an ear-shattering alarm that no, we are not living according to any natural order. The reason authoritarianism as governance will forever fail to produce stability is that the authoritarian mindset is one of self, of ego - exclusively interested in winning the moment, not producing long-term solutions.
Rutger Bregman's book, "Human Kindness" is a great testimony to our true nature as a species.
For now, we live in a virtual world imposed upon us by those on high - a world in which our ugliest tendencies are fostered, to keep us apart and empower the few.
I, think is time for you to re visit this argument Thom. We are going in the wrong direction right toward oligarchy. Thom, the traitors must go. This is bad for our country, Thom.
Humanity is advancing rapidly toward a future that is totally beyond our comprehension. Any attempt to lock that future to any historical past form is futile. History show us that what was necessary in the past happened to provide a temporary building block upon which to build the future. It is not wise to crucify ourselves on the alter of past ideologies, whose usefulness have been spent, and are waning. Our job is to transcend all of that without loosing any valued lessons. Humanity is fully capable of building a just and equitable future and is destined to do so. However, we need a fence to guide us around the swamp that will hinder our progress. The big question is what does that fence look like and how do we recognize it when appears. How it all unfolds is totally dependent on our individual decisions in conjunction with events in the physical world , including the present pandemic, that constrain us. By acting wisely, we will actively create the inevitable unimaginable future that is our destiny. We live in exciting and trying times .
A lot of the decision of oligarchy vs democracy revolves around whether people approach life’s decisions heavily weighed towards emotional attachment or analytical reflection. Usually, if a group of people believe that they want an authoritarian strongman to lead them, it most often arises out of an unthinking emotional attachment that they later regret when faced with the reality of having a psychopathic leader. The emotional attachment is so strong that it’s as if the individual’s adorations make them feel as if they and their “leader” are somehow spiritually tied together. It’s almost as if it’s a kind of mental stalking that makes the person feel that the autocratic leader is both a “man” who needs no other person, while living under the illusion that they can be almost friends (comrades?) against all others who may do them personal harm. They quickly find out that being governed oligarchically is only an advantage for the various leaders, but by that time they are often wishing - either outwardly (if they dare to) or inwardly with great regret - that they should’ve “got the Covid shot.” Folks that happily go about waving their guns have a surprise awaiting them and their authoritarian dreams when the supreme leader of any large population will never allow the people that they are ruling have free access to arms. If these idiots really think the Dems want to take away their guns, they’ll have a whole lot of sweating to do when their favorite despot becomes ruler.
A slightly different slant on an immensely complex subject
The birth of our nation happened amidst a worldwide the cacophony of wars, battles, and intrigues between nation states ruled by Kings and Ecclesiastics. The conviction of rule by Divine right, in which Kings and Ecclesiastics were not accountable to any earthly authority, was unassailable in most of the world. The events unfolding in North America were initially of minor importance but noticeable. The concept of rule by the people was truly revolutionary and clearly needed to be stopped, but contrary events unfolded that allowed it to grow against all odds. However, the conviction that rule by aristocracy with its underlying notion of Divine right has not been totally relegated to the dustbin of history, in fact it is reemerging in a last gasp effort to derail rule by the people. It has no lasting power behind it because it is attempting to take us backwards to a state of equilibrium that is impossible to resurrect.
Amongst the essential events in human history was the invention of the telegraph, which was formally introduced by Samuel Morse in 1844 when he sent the famous message “What hath God wrought” from Washington to Baltimore. With this message the worlds equilibrium was upset forever. Present day science and technology can be traced to that message which, in historical perspective, directly challenged the power of rule by Divine Right. In fact, the unenlightened of today seem to think of technology as the vehicle to rule by Divine Right.
The seeds planted in our new democracy in conjunction with technology, began to erode the divine power equilibrium of rule by bygone Kings and Ecclesiastes via loss of wars, their enormous fortunes, and revolutionary forces. Inevitably, the power and concepts inherited from the past are fading despite attempts by some to perpetuate them based on idle fancies and vain imaginings of what history tells us. However, the underlying concept is still with us.
The birth of a new equilibrium is not an easy process because past thought remains strong but slowly losing momentum. The main baggage in today’s incarnation of Divine Power is “I can do as I please because I have no earthly constraints”. The simplest form is the gunman who says” I did it because I could” where the gun provided the power. For people with great wealth and influence, they can do as they please “because they can”, because they have the resources.
It is of prime importance to understanding that while “not having earthly constraints” may appear to be true, Divine Will inevitably wins. This begs the question of who of us humans, past, present, and future have unfettered and infinitely pure access to Divine Will. There are many in the past, in the present, and in the future who claim that distinction. If all claims are false, then access to Divine Will is never available to humanity and why does the concept even exist. To allow the concept to exist and not provide access is the height of injustice. The mystery continues, until the true seeker finds the Beloved.