Democratic vs undemocratic

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

Moderator: Uccisore

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Sat Aug 05, 2017 12:53 am

WendyDarling wrote:I don't understand how corrupt leaders would be weeded out before any damage is incurred.

If you start with "corrupt leaders", no doubt a little "damage" would occur before it got corrected. That depends on how alert members in the group happen to be. Corruption depends upon deception and ignorance. Since everything is being documented and verified, it is tough to maintain deception. In the long run, it isn't worth the effort. But even if you are the Hitler type and gain total control over the governance .. of all 50 people? Big deal. Then what? The mafia and city governments do far worse.

WendyDarling wrote:Also, everything up for debate must be sited in written form first (following a standard of reason with evidence/proof)? Who decides what standard is approved?

All reasoning is fundamentally based upon logic. But logic can easily allow for other forms of reasoning to take over in special circumstances. "What shall we have for dinner?" - Logic isn't likely to help much other than to suggest another means for making the decision, perhaps a diet plan, a vote, or round robin. Logic dictates whether the Constitution is being upheld, beyond that, anything goes.

WendyDarling wrote: I guess I'm still not understanding this and how it would work with very small groups (of 4 ppl.) and very large groups (of 50 ppl.)? Are these co-ops made up of a few families in your mind?

Think of it in terms of a small business. You have different people in charge of different necessary tasks; marketing, Accounting, Engineering, Production,... But unlike small businesses, members get to see why and how everyone is doing what they are doing. The accountant can't hide the profits from the members nor the resource and asset values. And this particular type of "business" is concerned with the entirety of life's issues, not merely selling goods or services for money. Often in small towns, small businesses are very similar in that regard because everyone is considered "family" and often in need of cooperation.

And yes, I would expect several biological families to be involved in forming a particular SAM family. What rules they choose to enforce beyond the constitution is entirely up to them. So they might choose to be all female or all male or whatever - different strokes....

The SAM Constitution is merely a framework to maintain while pursuing whatever else is of interest. It merely ensures that the basic concerns of living are established and maintained (including "purpose"). It is much like every car having the basics; a steering wheel, windshield, brakes, and so on. Where and how you drive the car is up to you (or until the AI cars are mandatory and dictate your options).
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25436
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Otto_West » Sat Aug 05, 2017 6:25 am

Arminius wrote:
AutSider wrote:Image

This is interesting. One could make the argument that even in a democracy there are still people who disagree with the politicians in power, so they must have some level of protection. But then how come that "authoritarian" leaders who supposedly oppress the general population are so well liked that they interact openly and physically with the people?

I think the answer may lie in the fact that in democracies, although technically everybody has a vote nobody's vote influences politics to a significant extent, so all other factors equal, people are just as unhappy/happy as in authoritarian societies. Seriously, what's the big difference between not being able to vote and having 0% influence and being able to vote and having 0.000001% or so influence? It's completely insignificant.

One big difference between authoritarian and democratic societies is that in authoritarian societies, since it is made clear that politicians have power and the people do not, all responsibility will be placed on politicians and if they do a bad job, woe be unto them - the people may get pissed off and riot, or even start a revolution and overthrow the authoritarian government.
But in democratic governments if politicians do bad things, they will not be held responsible because you, the average Joe, supposedly picked them, even though you practically had no influence on who gets picked. So people tend to put undue responsibility and blame on themselves which prevents them from questioning and overthrowing a corrupt political order because it gives them an illusion of choice and thus responsibility for that choice.

Voting only truly matters if it is restricted to a small portion of the population so that each individual vote has a reasonable influence on the outcome. Otherwise it's just a sham to keep people obedient and sheepish.

Yes, and it is because of the support of the almost unknown real rulers having nothing to do with democracy.

Voting is only good for a small group - up to tribes (at the most!).

For example: The Ancient German or the Ancient Gallican tribes voted just because of the same interests they had as a small group. If the number of each of their tribes had not been as small as it had been, then the most votings would not work well or only work in the case of a same interest of something like a nation. Examples are (1) the unseccessful of almost all Gallican tribes under Vercingetorix against the Romans in the year 58 BC and (2) the successful war of almost all German tribes under Arminius against the Romans in the year 9. Almost all of those tribes were united for a relatively short time because they had a common interest, but the tribes - and thus: not the nation - had decided this by voting. If they had already been a real nation, then they would have decided like the current nations do today: according to the corruption.

But where do we have such tribes today? There are not really such tribes anymore (and "gangs“ are no tribes in the traditional sense). That is the problem too, namely of the whole world of today.


In the early days of ancient man villages would slaughter other villages pillaging and taking their resources, a tribe can be considered a gang of men and women. It comes down to one group of people against another.

The modern tribal unit use to be comprised of ethnic nationals but with the advent of globalization and economic materialism groups of people are merely divided by classist economic input or money.
Your entire world of fantasy and make believe is doomed, have a nice day.
User avatar
Otto_West
Doom Pornographer
 
Posts: 898
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 7:40 pm
Location: Dumbfuckistan- Will Work For Depreciating (FRN) Shekels.

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Meno_ » Sat Aug 05, 2017 7:31 am

James: the 50-50 split as a modicum of not a cut off point, but a kind of overlap in a continuum, best defined by applying the prisoners's dilemma, to express bonding in terms of co-operation within a range of total randomly selected, and redundant c
hoices -to-entirely coerced, antropic ones, that a finding of co-operation , [in case of such cooperation] TO the maximally entropic , minimally
co-operative - , that such involves the functionally
invasive cross value-which may change the hypothetical fulcrum of the 50-50 split.

To this type of scenario could values be attached, minimal in the lower, less redundant levels . The point You are making is well taken, that this representation transposes values from one to the other side of the fulcrum, changing and transforming values as a result. A cut off of one from the other was not intended, as the point in fact that democracy has suffered an anamolie be a de-differentiation of what is considered 'democratic' from one that is not.

For example, the Deep South was formerly, not too long ago considered solidly democratic, while now, it is republican. The dilemma consists of being bound into a set definition, while co-operation of less randomly effected pre-set patterns of value become predominant.

The relation to redundantly more randomly selected
patterns of value set co-operation at a minimum, regardless of the set value. In other words , co-operation in the democratic model seems to be based less on the inference of the value itself, but more on how co-operating on any value x, solves the dilemma of co-operation. It becomes the function of Democracy to co-operate given any value x, then to reduce the level of arbitrariness of such a value.

50-50 is some kind of bargaining chip-model between these two modes of organization, to establish the level of co-operation, among themselves, vis. the underlying authority keeping them captive to some arrangement.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2385
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Sat Aug 05, 2017 3:43 pm

Meno_ wrote:James: the 50-50 split as a modicum of not a cut off point, but a kind of overlap in a continuum, best defined by applying the prisoners's dilemma, to express bonding in terms of co-operation within a range of total randomly selected, and redundant c
hoices -to-entirely coerced, antropic ones, that a finding of co-operation , [in case of such cooperation] TO the maximally entropic , minimally
co-operative - , that such involves the functionally
invasive cross value-which may change the hypothetical fulcrum of the 50-50 split.

To this type of scenario could values be attached, minimal in the lower, less redundant levels . The point You are making is well taken, that this representation transposes values from one to the other side of the fulcrum, changing and transforming values as a result. A cut off of one from the other was not intended, as the point in fact that democracy has suffered an anamolie be a de-differentiation of what is considered 'democratic' from one that is not.

For example, the Deep South was formerly, not too long ago considered solidly democratic, while now, it is republican. The dilemma consists of being bound into a set definition, while co-operation of less randomly effected pre-set patterns of value become predominant.

The relation to redundantly more randomly selected
patterns of value set co-operation at a minimum, regardless of the set value. In other words , co-operation in the democratic model seems to be based less on the inference of the value itself, but more on how co-operating on any value x, solves the dilemma of co-operation. It becomes the function of Democracy to co-operate given any value x, then to reduce the level of arbitrariness of such a value.

50-50 is some kind of bargaining chip-model between these two modes of organization, to establish the level of co-operation, among themselves, vis. the underlying authority keeping them captive to some arrangement.

Okay. I prefer posts being in English sentences, but I think I understand what you are getting at. The Prisoner's Dilemma and such scenario's are about blind stabs in the dark, where no one knows for sure what the others are thinking, so they have to guess and take high risks. SAM is a serious game changer. Deception, having to guess at what is really going on, and all of the risks involved are no longer the norm. Deception becomes very difficult. There are no longer any hidden dark secrets to have to guess about. It is a seriously different world. Trust is not merely easy, but inherent and regularly reinforced. You have never lived in such an environment. And they don't make games from it because it isn't about competing forces, everyone pitted against everyone else. SAM is the strategic harmony.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25436
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Meno_ » Sat Aug 05, 2017 4:00 pm

Thanks for that. I too understand the difference here, again with the basic difference revolving around questions of trust as inversely to risk, and self through group knowledge. Again maybe the differential could be envisioned as one of degree, theregpfore as such, individual experiences could be to some degree ascertained.

That total hiddenness is possible in this scenario, as in the case of spies or unwanted moles, would be obvious to those who can discern such. And that goes also at the other end, where different languages as codes are used, especially as they relate to translation issues with a primary language.

Thanks
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2385
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Sat Aug 05, 2017 4:20 pm

Meno_ wrote:Thanks for that. I too understand the difference here, again with the basic difference revolving around questions of trust as inversely to risk, and self through group knowledge. Again maybe the differential could be envisioned as one of degree, theregpfore as such, individual experiences could be to some degree ascertained.

That total hiddenness is possible in this scenario, as in the case of spies or unwanted moles, would be obvious to those who can discern such. And that goes also at the other end, where different languages as codes are used, especially as they relate to translation issues with a primary language.

Thanks

As it turns out, such malignant behavior is futile. Directives are goal driven and specified. Efforts to undermine a plan merely distracts from the goal. When the goal is being thwarted, even by hidden forces, new plans are immediately formed to compensate for the contingency. Realize that you aren't deal with very many people. There is hardly room for a cabal to form, and hardly any point in bothering with it. Betrayers popup. That is to be expected and compensated. But the collusion of a gang of betrayers when there are so few people merely means that the group is not interested in maintaining the Constitution. The "cell" dies from being over-poisoned.

But upon the realization that group members aren't interested in the Constitution, a newly formed group appears made of the members who actually were interested. If the poison continues, intelligence is brought forth to choose how to isolate and expel it. The "cell" can continue reforming eternally as long as anyone is still interested. That is why life is so difficult to stop. SAM is an organic life form, much like a living cell, made of people. But unlike biological cells, a SAM cell can regenerate and evolve, eternally continuing to adapt to and out maneuver its potentially hostile environment. Similar happens when a business folds. Perhaps there was a betrayer. The business partners still interested merely start over with a different membership and method.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25436
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Meno_ » Sat Aug 05, 2017 4:53 pm

Unless it's recognized that shared goals and their attainment overcome the parts which cause more difference than partial identity, as a primary starting off point. The whole problem with acclimatization or fitting has to do with not only the integration of primary and secondary processes, but of the co-operation of differing political leanings. That there is linkage, (I almost said leakage), there is little doubt, by necessity.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2385
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:36 pm

Meno_ wrote:Unless it's recognized that shared goals and their attainment overcome the parts which cause more difference than partial identity, as a primary starting off point. The whole problem with acclimatization or fitting has to do with not only the integration of primary and secondary processes, but of the co-operation of differing political leanings. That there is linkage, (I almost said leakage), there is little doubt, by necessity.

There is an inside and an outside. And on the outside, there are a great many more insides and outsides. Find the inside most harmonious to you, else remain outside.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25436
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Meno_ » Sat Aug 05, 2017 6:30 pm

James,

That's just the point, the differences between inside and outside are incrementally indiscernible. Which gives credit to Your observation. But on the level of a participation mystique of basic bonding, wouldn't such separation prove counter productive, bilaterally?

If a humanist, wouldn't it be sympathetic more sympathetic?



On a differing note, reclusion sometimes makes more sense. Other options are available, but it is all ego bounded.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2385
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:39 pm

Meno_ wrote:James,

That's just the point, the differences between inside and outside are incrementally indiscernible.

I wouldn't say that. There are those who have agreed and those who have not. It is pretty much that easy.

Meno_ wrote:Which gives credit to Your observation. But on the level of a participation mystique of basic bonding, wouldn't such separation prove counter productive, bilaterally?

If a humanist, wouldn't it be sympathetic more sympathetic?



On a differing note, reclusion sometimes makes more sense. Other options are available, but it is all ego bounded.

I'm not sure that I am following you, but I'm getting the urge to speak of how relevance extends in an exponential decline. The entire universe is not one big single atom for a reason. Distance is determined by relevance and vsvrsa. Such a thought is hardly inhuman. Take care of your own business first, then you are in a position to help others. If you don't put the higher priority on your own business, you won't be able to help anyone else. It is similar to that "love yourself first" ploy, except that love requires something other than oneself, so love the closest to you first, before the quarreling doodle bug population in China or Africa, or Washington.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25436
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Meno_ » Sat Aug 05, 2017 9:23 pm

This forum is not based on argument for its own sake, or evaluating the degrees of relevance as far as how much of it is proximal or extended. There is no way, really to evaluate that difference from the point of view of a more objective, more remote recognition .

This is why, third opinions are appreciated, and differing points of view should be considered. Sometimes the handwriting is on the wall, sometimes not, but in essence another observation regarding existential leaps versus more in depth analysis of the Dasein, too, can be examined as the basis of how these two differentiable, but not necessary different conceptual tests may be taken into consideration.

Weather it is as important to be a participant, then merely a bystander, there is no doubt, and to use logical exclusion on the basis of this supposed difference, may or may not sufficiently meet the test.

Nevertheless, good grace is required. Not to forgot the need to signify that from which such signification
can reversely effect the very one that needs a more
extended vision-allows for constant revision, in light of what is going on politically between major and minor premises.


I am obsessed by Trumpism as opposed to the liberal left, and maybe because what I feel to be a very
unique example of a cohesive process of simplifying a
very serious schism within and without either a more authoritative, or a less so, a more liberal one, what appears to be at the moment , a standoff.

I simply can not abandon this in favor of a total denial of a compulsive need, in light of the mortal danger, which exists for me in or out of the box.

That is more helpful to stay within or without, makes little sense to me, while I am 'out of it'.

So if You could, extend the vision of a broader humanity, then simply one where by Your own admission , either this or that may work.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2385
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:40 pm

Meno_ wrote:This forum is not based on argument for its own sake, or evaluating the degrees of relevance as far as how much of it is proximal or extended. There is no way, really to evaluate that difference from the point of view of a more objective, more remote recognition .

This is why, third opinions are appreciated, and differing points of view should be considered. Sometimes the handwriting is on the wall, sometimes not, but in essence another observation regarding existential leaps versus more in depth analysis of the Dasein, too, can be examined as the basis of how these two differentiable, but not necessary different conceptual tests may be taken into consideration.

Weather it is as important to be a participant, then merely a bystander, there is no doubt, and to use logical exclusion on the basis of this supposed difference, may or may not sufficiently meet the test.

Nevertheless, good grace is required. Not to forgot the need to signify that from which such signification
can reversely effect the very one that needs a more
extended vision-allows for constant revision, in light of what is going on politically between major and minor premises.


I am obsessed by Trumpism as opposed to the liberal left, and maybe because what I feel to be a very
unique example of a cohesive process of simplifying a
very serious schism within and without either a more authoritative, or a less so, a more liberal one, what appears to be at the moment , a standoff.

I simply can not abandon this in favor of a total denial of a compulsive need, in light of the mortal danger, which exists for me in or out of the box.

That is more helpful to stay within or without, makes little sense to me, while I am 'out of it'.

So if You could, extend the vision of a broader humanity, then simply one where by Your own admission , either this or that may work.

Well now I am even more certain that I am not following whatever you have been talking about. I was referring to the issue of priority and remoteness, such as saving the life of your next door neighbor vs someone on a distant planet. You seem now to be talking about argument methods, politics, or something. I give up.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25436
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Meno_ » Sun Aug 06, 2017 12:06 am

Please don't. I am working hard to get ideas across.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2385
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby 1mpious » Sun Aug 06, 2017 1:24 am

AutSider wrote:Voting only truly matters if it is restricted to a small portion of the population so that each individual vote has a reasonable influence on the outcome. Otherwise it's just a sham to keep people obedient and sheepish.

Was like that for hundreds of years in Britain (only landowners vote). Was it better? I suppose you can't deny the imperical success under that system...
User avatar
1mpious
decent guy
 
Posts: 358
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:58 am
Location: Sydney

Previous

Return to Society, Government, and Economics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider]