oligarchy appears to be the natural state of affairs in most human systems and, despite that, tends not to be discussed much (instead we hear about democracy, fascism, communism, etc)
i think the best solution to this dynamic is many smaller units (states, companies, etc) so that oligarchies compete with one another, but this requires a type of system design and a vibe largely out of favor in todays world (e.g. secession & trust-busting for governments & corporations, respectively)
The author was part of an institution in Facist Italy that espoused the superhumanism of these “elites” over the little people as one of their core tenants:
“The psychological difference that sets elites apart is that they have personal resources, for instance intelligence and skills, and a vested interest in the government; whilst the rest are incompetent and do not have the capabilities to govern themselves, the elite are resourceful and strive to make the government work.”
>since no sufficiently large and complex organization can function purely as a direct democracy
This right here is ripe for disruption. No longer is there any technical barrier to a direct democracy. If we can move billions of wealth in minutes, we can have billions of votes in the same amount of time.
5 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 32.0 ms ] thread[0] https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm
i think the best solution to this dynamic is many smaller units (states, companies, etc) so that oligarchies compete with one another, but this requires a type of system design and a vibe largely out of favor in todays world (e.g. secession & trust-busting for governments & corporations, respectively)
This right here is ripe for disruption. No longer is there any technical barrier to a direct democracy. If we can move billions of wealth in minutes, we can have billions of votes in the same amount of time.