Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (14664)	5/28/2001 2:07:33 AM
From: Greg or e	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"In my model, REASON would rule, because it does not stand above anyone as an organism (as do human RULERS), but is more like a well from which all may drink the same water. Add to that a genuine respect for the feelings of others, and a willingness to give a bit more than you take, and you find people who are able to discover answers and solutions on a daily basis without stagnating with rules and policies no longer applicable." So you would have no rules except your rules? LOL!! You can't account for reason from a random universe, and the other two are hopelessly naive. Talk about pie in the sky! The real reason it will never be tried is that it's obvious that it won't work. If you were truly consistent you would be advocating pure anarchy. Tyranny is really much more efficient, and would be the inevitable result of anarchy anyway.

To: Solon who wrote (14664)	5/28/2001 8:58:10 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

The character of the hypothetical secular idea that you raised is probably best described as direct democracy. I did not intend to propose direct democracy for the island, merely that it be founded by seculars, although I don't have any objection to your having taken that next step. I agree that the island would be an excellent climate for direct democracy to flourish, but I don't assume that it would be inevitable. I agree that the basic requirements for participants in that style of governance are maturity and flexible minds. I'm very fond of the model you describe. I had an epiphany regarding it nearly thirty years ago when I found myself on a leaderless team at work. We were four representatives, no one was assigned to be in charge, and we decided amongst ourselves to not choose one of us to lead. Concurrently, I was in grad school in a class on group dynamics so I got to study myself and the group while operating in it. That was the most satisfying work experience I ever had. It fostered my interest in management and, later, management consulting. I have quite a bit of experience with leaderless teams and am very much an advocate of them. I think that direct democracy has size limitations. Our island couldn't grow much without outgrowing that model and needing some structure. I believe that most people who reasoned in such a way would probably also be the kind of people who would prefer to cast their lot with the entire spectrum of humanity--for a variety of reasons. I agree. Karen