Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[King DZA]

The problem as a whole is that somone, genius or not, will eventually try to take control. Maybe that someone will be so charismatic other will follow him/her and conquer those that refuse to follow. The problem with humanity itself, is that there must always be a leader. If there isn't, one will appear. People require leaders, and if there is none they'll bicker and fight amongst themselves until one appears, it's just our way. People haven't destroyed the planet yet due to a sense of self-preservation more than anything else, I belive. I pity any alien that decides to invade our planet, given that we are a bunch of violent primates with weapons of mass destruction.


Also, the Mega-Phallus is still under construction. I've been too busy to play DF.

I cannot tell you how many times i've heard similar arguments, so don't worry, i have definitely taken it into consideration. What it comes down to is:

I'm a human being, i do not feel the need for a leader. Most the time, i have no desire to murder others, and if i do, it is easily manageable with self-control. I know for a fact many others feel the same.
I know that many who oppose this idea, do not dislike the idea itself, but rather the fear of such massive change. This can be overcome. I also know many people would gladly accept this system over current ones, but many are, understandably, afraid to act.

I'm aware that there will always be a need for someone for people to look up to. This is why i propose a system of guides. People with experience in certain areas, who can give guidance and advice to those who desire it. However, they have no true authority over anyone. If a guide does manage to manipulate others to fight and conquer for him/her, the force should be far too small to be the downfall of a society of intellectuals.

The hardest part of changing the world is convincing people that change is possible. Give it a few centuries, later generations will wonder how we ever lived with such futile systems for so long.

I know it seems like humanity really sucks sometimes, but there's more hope for your kin than you think. I mean, we made it this far, all while thinking "alright, this is the time were gonna completely fuck ourselves over". So i think we have the capability to learn from our mistakes eventually.

[ZeroSumHappiness]

I couldn't do Jiu Jitsu even if I tried, due to me being a meatless skeleton 

If you're a meatless skeleton you might want to look at aikido.  It gives a lot of options without requiring intense power or even flexibility.

In a very basic form, my idea is to have a society of cooperating, educated individuals, free of laws or rulers(ironic, considering my username).
There will be no need for laws against murder, since people will know how to solve problems without killing one another. There will be no need for laws against theft, if someone needed food or shelter, the members of the society as a collective would help to provide it, with the assurance that, if they are ever in need, the same will be done for them. It will likely make monetary systems obsolete as well. And there will be no need for rulers, as people will be much more self-sufficient, and know how to take control of their own damn lives.

What you're describing is known as an "anarchist communist collective," the philosophy being anarcho-communism.  No joke but there are two known setups where it works reasonably:  Pirates and Christians.  In fact, the Amish (and other cool Christian sects, like Quakers, Mennonites and, to a lesser extent, Presbyterians (probably more, too)) are pretty good about it and work pretty close to that.  They still work within societal rules about money but are more open about sharing and helping others.  Though the Christians, if they want to be political about it, call it Christian anarchy or Christian communism.

[Necro910]

The problem as a whole is that somone, genius or not, will eventually try to take control. Maybe that someone will be so charismatic other will follow him/her and conquer those that refuse to follow. The problem with humanity itself, is that there must always be a leader. If there isn't, one will appear. People require leaders, and if there is none they'll bicker and fight amongst themselves until one appears, it's just our way. People haven't destroyed the planet yet due to a sense of self-preservation more than anything else, I belive. I pity any alien that decides to invade our planet, given that we are a bunch of violent primates with weapons of mass destruction.


Also, the Mega-Phallus is still under construction. I've been too busy to play DF.

I cannot tell you how many times i've heard similar arguments, so don't worry, i have definitely taken it into consideration. What it comes down to is:

I'm a human being, i do not feel the need for a leader. Most the time, i have no desire to murder others, and if i do, it is easily manageable with self-control. I know for a fact many others feel the same.
I know that many who oppose this idea, do not dislike the idea itself, but rather the fear of such massive change. This can be overcome. I also know many people would gladly accept this system over current ones, but many are, understandably, afraid to act.

I'm aware that there will always be a need for someone for people to look up to. This is why i propose a system of guides. People with experience in certain areas, who can give guidance and advice to those who desire it. However, they have no true authority over anyone. If a guide does manage to manipulate others to fight and conquer for him/her, the force should be far too small to be the downfall of a society of intellectuals.

The hardest part of changing the world is convincing people that change is possible. Give it a few centuries, later generations will wonder how we ever lived with such futile systems for so long.

I know it seems like humanity really sucks sometimes, but there's more hope for your kin than you think. I mean, we made it this far, all while thinking "alright, this is the time were gonna completely fuck ourselves over". So i think we have the capability to learn from our mistakes eventually.

But CAN you murder someone? Most people are not intellectuals, and may want a leader. Maybe they'll fight, and then listen to the one who eventually stops the fighting. Maybe there will be a religious leader rising up, and he'll have everyone either in his cult, or under the cult's boot. Maybe a group of people (See: Rednecks and/or people who want power) will grab guns and wreck shit. Maybe a dictator will rise, and convince his people to fight for the (Insert generic ideology) cause.

Will you be the one to stand up, and slay the beast? Will you be the one who grabs their gun, and takes the fight to tyranny itself? If you said no, you are shot by the enemy. If you say yes, you are supporting the group that you have joined.

Also, the groups don't even need to use violence. A CEO of a major pharmaceutical corporation could just say "Follow me, or you won't get your meds". Obeying him would make him leader, stopping him would be fighting a capitalist citizen, and would just fuck up the pharmaceutical corporation, leading to no moar pilz 4 u yet again.

I couldn't do Jiu Jitsu even if I tried, due to me being a meatless skeleton 

If you're a meatless skeleton you might want to look at aikido.  It gives a lot of options without requiring intense power or even flexibility.

In a very basic form, my idea is to have a society of cooperating, educated individuals, free of laws or rulers(ironic, considering my username).
There will be no need for laws against murder, since people will know how to solve problems without killing one another. There will be no need for laws against theft, if someone needed food or shelter, the members of the society as a collective would help to provide it, with the assurance that, if they are ever in need, the same will be done for them. It will likely make monetary systems obsolete as well. And there will be no need for rulers, as people will be much more self-sufficient, and know how to take control of their own damn lives.

What you're describing is known as an "anarchist communist collective," the philosophy being anarcho-communism.  No joke but there are two known setups where it works reasonably:  Pirates and Christians.  In fact, the Amish (and other cool Christian sects, like Quakers, Mennonites and, to a lesser extent, Presbyterians (probably more, too)) are pretty good about it and work pretty close to that.  They still work within societal rules about money but are more open about sharing and helping others.  Though the Christians, if they want to be political about it, call it Christian anarchy or Christian communism.

Fighting: I'll take a look 

Society: Mhm. But then we'd need to force everyone to become Amish/Quaker, which would go bad. And making everyone pirates would not work large scale 

[King DZA]

What you're describing is known as an "anarchist communist collective," the philosophy being anarcho-communism.  No joke but there are two known setups where it works reasonably:  Pirates and Christians.  In fact, the Amish (and other cool Christian sects, like Quakers, Mennonites and, to a lesser extent, Presbyterians (probably more, too)) are pretty good about it and work pretty close to that.  They still work within societal rules about money but are more open about sharing and helping others.  Though the Christians, if they want to be political about it, call it Christian anarchy or Christian communism.

Geez, Zero. You're like a sentient encyclopedia . With a few tweaks, that system could very well be what i'm going for, which is good because it means i don't have to think of a name for what the hell i'm talking about.

Society: Mhm. But then we'd need to force everyone to become Amish/Quaker, which would go bad. And making everyone pirates would not work large scale 

Oh, come on Necro, you know a world of pirates would be fucking awesome.

But really, could i kill someone? Yes. i probably wouldn't enjoy it, but i'm capable of it.

Trust, me i'm well aware of all the situations in which my amazing vision could go horribly wrong. People have pointed them out to me many, many times.

I'm not saying i have every detail figured out, or that it is the single most perfect system in the world. What i do know is that it sounds a hell of a lot better than what we have going now, and that if i don't attempt to bring it into fruition, then nothing will change. I can't guarantee that my attempt won't turn into a horrible debacle, but as long as there is even the smallest chance it could work, i'll continue to try.

It's true, most of humanity isn't the brilliant group of intellectuals i expect them to become, but that doesn't mean they couldn't become one under the right conditions.

As i've said before, it all comes down to the people involved. If humanity never learns, then we will be destroyed. But i know people are growing tired of all the bullshit we create for ourselves, it's just a matter of choosing to act. If enough people do so, corporations and tyrants will hardly be a problem, Even the most powerful of them are nothing without people to control.

It's a matter of getting people to realize, if they act, they won't need those assholes to provide meds, food, or whatever else for them. The production of such things will no longer be under their control.
Change the minds of the people, change the world.

Honestly, i would rather die in a pool of my own blood, living my last moments in unbearable pain, knowing that i did all i could to try and make this world suck less, than have a care-free and luxurious life in the fucked up state it's currently in. One way or another, it's gonna be a fun ride.

Goddamn i'm inspirational.

[Eddren]

Anarcho-Communism. Haven't heard that since I lead groups in MMOs. Had a Leader who was an Anarcho-Communist.

[Teneb]

Anarcho-Communism. Haven't heard that since I lead groups in MMOs. Had a Leader who was an Anarcho-Communist.

I'm just an anarchist, is that acceptable?

[Kofthefens]

What does these forums say about human nature? Phalli spewing magma to what a true utopia is. I find it creepy how closely connected everything is.

[elf-fondling human]

Society: Mhm. But then we'd need to force everyone to become Amish/Quaker, which would go bad. And making everyone pirates would not work large scale 

Oh, come on Necro, you know a world of pirates would be fucking awesome.

You mean like...

Spoiler: THIS!? (click to show/hide)

http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page

[Necro910]

What you're describing is known as an "anarchist communist collective," the philosophy being anarcho-communism.  No joke but there are two known setups where it works reasonably:  Pirates and Christians.  In fact, the Amish (and other cool Christian sects, like Quakers, Mennonites and, to a lesser extent, Presbyterians (probably more, too)) are pretty good about it and work pretty close to that.  They still work within societal rules about money but are more open about sharing and helping others.  Though the Christians, if they want to be political about it, call it Christian anarchy or Christian communism.

Geez, Zero. You're like a sentient encyclopedia . With a few tweaks, that system could very well be what i'm going for, which is good because it means i don't have to think of a name for what the hell i'm talking about.

Society: Mhm. But then we'd need to force everyone to become Amish/Quaker, which would go bad. And making everyone pirates would not work large scale 

Oh, come on Necro, you know a world of pirates would be fucking awesome.

But really, could i kill someone? Yes. i probably wouldn't enjoy it, but i'm capable of it.

Trust, me i'm well aware of all the situations in which my amazing vision could go horribly wrong. People have pointed them out to me many, many times.

I'm not saying i have every detail figured out, or that it is the single most perfect system in the world. What i do know is that it sounds a hell of a lot better than what we have going now, and that if i don't attempt to bring it into fruition, then nothing will change. I can't guarantee that my attempt won't turn into a horrible debacle, but as long as there is even the smallest chance it could work, i'll continue to try.

It's true, most of humanity isn't the brilliant group of intellectuals i expect them to become, but that doesn't mean they couldn't become one under the right conditions.

As i've said before, it all comes down to the people involved. If humanity never learns, then we will be destroyed. But i know people are growing tired of all the bullshit we create for ourselves, it's just a matter of choosing to act. If enough people do so, corporations and tyrants will hardly be a problem, Even the most powerful of them are nothing without people to control.

It's a matter of getting people to realize, if they act, they won't need those assholes to provide meds, food, or whatever else for them. The production of such things will no longer be under their control.
Change the minds of the people, change the world.

Honestly, i would rather die in a pool of my own blood, living my last moments in unbearable pain, knowing that i did all i could to try and make this world suck less, than have a care-free and luxurious life in the fucked up state it's currently in. One way or another, it's gonna be a fun ride.

Goddamn i'm inspirational.

A world where everyone is pirates? FUCK YEAH

Society: I agree with you, that would be ideal. If there was some way to get it to work, I'm with you. But the corporations and leaders have the media on their side, and the media is a powerful weapon.

Death: Indeed. You're going to die anyway, why not have it mean something?

[Eddren]

Well, here's another point where DF is accurate:
Try using this form of Government in Dwarf Fortress.

If they survive for a year, my hat's off to 'em.

[elf-fondling human]

Just realized something after a One Piece wiki binge: if anarchy is really a viable...thing, we would need to get rid of censorship entirely.

[Necro910]

Just realized something after a One Piece wiki binge: if anarchy is really a viable...thing, we would need to get rid of censorship entirely.

No derp. To have anarchy, we would have no one to tell us not to shove mutilated whores infront of the camera.

Well, here's another point where DF is accurate:
Try using this form of Government in Dwarf Fortress.

If they survive for a year, my hat's off to 'em.

Elves are like that, but things aren't as complicated in world gen 

[i2amroy]

Death: Indeed. You're going to die anyway, why not have it mean something?

But this is the thing that so many people fail to realize these days is that with current technology rates death is no longer a set in stone thing. With the current trends for advances in not only medical technology but across technology as a whole, the current younger generations (teens + early twenties, maybe all of the way up to the early thirties if they live right) can actually live to reach the point where technology is increasing their lifespan at a rate faster than 1 second per second. This would then result in a pseudo-immortal life, where it is impossible to die of old age. I know that it sounds crazy and many of you are going "but what about this?" But please hear me out before you judge me. Currently trends in technology ranging from computers to medicine to rockets are all showing the same thing, that not only is the level of technology increasing, but the rate that the level of technology is increasing as well. The trends are all quadratic!

Unfortunately for humans however, we have always had rather linear minds. When a person is trying to hit a target with a spear or a gun, they track a linear distance ahead of the target and fire. When a person thinks in terms of advancement this same restriction applies. We think that "we got this much done in 10 years, so hopefully we will get the same amount done in the next 10 years as well", a thought that while usually helpful, is dead wrong for the trends in current society. Instead we should be thinking like "we got this much done in 10 years, using these new advancements we should be able to get at least double this amount done in the next 10 years". And it's proven true so far. Currently knowledge (as measured in scholarly papers) is showing this doubling trend in just about every field out there right now and is expanding exponentially.

The crazy thing though? Most of these trends still continue even if you trace them as far back as the 1800's, sometimes even farther. The only reason that people thought that knowledge growth was linear then was that the increases were still so small at the time that the doubling was occurring much slower. The ideas sound crazy but if you manage to think past your linearly-programmed mind and realize the quadratic equations that apply to reality you manage to absorb so many crazy facts like that in 2045 we manage to invent a computer that is smarter then we are (give or take 10 years to account for errors, TIME magazine ran an article on this if you don't believe me). Combine that trend into the current trends in the medical fields and you get the pseudo-immoral life I was talking of earlier, where death becomes a thing that only happens with accidents or choice, and it's going to happen well within the lives of many currently alive today. (I can cite sources for most of this if you really want me to)

Anyways sorry for the big blocks of text. Pirates are cool and all that though I'm not sure how well a government of them would apply to large groups of people (Arson, pillaging, murder, and arson!).

Edit: On that last note though, I think that having a greatly increased average lifespan would also greatly increase our hatred and bias towards murderers. If you imagine the average lifespan of a human being 800 years instead of 80, that means that your average murder victim (average age for murder victims circa '98 was ~29) goes from being a younger adult into being the somewhat equivalent of a 2.9 year old. How do you think it would make you feel if every single murder was the killing of a 2-4 year old kid? I think that that should help cut down on some of the killing at least should the world dissolve into chaos.

[Mitchewawa]

Edit: On that last note though, I think that having a greatly increased average lifespan would also greatly increase our hatred and bias towards murderers. If you imagine the average lifespan of a human being 800 years instead of 80, that means that your average murder victim (average age for murder victims circa '98 was ~29) goes from being a younger adult into being the somewhat equivalent of a 2.9 year old. How do you think it would make you feel if every single murder was the killing of a 2-4 year old kid? I think that that should help cut down on some of the killing at least should the world dissolve into chaos.

If this was in DF my reaction would most likely be, "Atleast it wasn't an actual worker."

[i2amroy]

Edit: On that last note though, I think that having a greatly increased average lifespan would also greatly increase our hatred and bias towards murderers. If you imagine the average lifespan of a human being 800 years instead of 80, that means that your average murder victim (average age for murder victims circa '98 was ~29) goes from being a younger adult into being the somewhat equivalent of a 2.9 year old. How do you think it would make you feel if every single murder was the killing of a 2-4 year old kid? I think that that should help cut down on some of the killing at least should the world dissolve into chaos.

If this was in DF my reaction would most likely be, "Atleast it wasn't an actual worker."

Guess I should have remembered my audience a little better when I was writing that.