The Democracy Trap

Don't like consensus-based democracy? Got a better idea?

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• democracy
• democratic
• elections
• horse-trading
• consensus
• politics
• deal
• negotiation
• negotiate
• legislature
• freedom
• democrat
• congress
• parliament
• union
• unions
• confederation
• assembly
• politician
• politicians
• disgusting
• dictatorship
• interests
• realism
• hard-nosed
• trades unions
• unionism
• labor unions
• labour unions
• grey area
• idealism
• ideals
• practical

[Anekantavad]

@SlaveryEvolves What consequences are there to the "don't kill" rule?

[SlaveryEvolves]

@SlaveryEvolves Whether or not there is "a buffet" isn't a matter of opinion.

[SlaveryEvolves]

@Anekantavad No, because there's no consequences 2 opting out (aside from those that result from not being in) in anarchy. If u opt out of the "don't kill rule" it doesn't mean that if you kill someone who hasn't opted out of that rule, you don't get the consequences. It just means that if someone kills you, they don't get the consequences. In that sense it's "bouble-edged", but so is everything: from marriage to volcano insurrance, from living healthy to going to work today. (cont'd in reply)

[Anekantavad]

@SlaveryEvolves "The right to life you think you have can be broken just as easily now."

The same logic says that we already live in anarchy, no?

[SlaveryEvolves]

@Anekantavad Rights don't exist. The right to life you think you have can be broken just as easily now. There are consequences to taking your life, those consequences protect you. Anarchy, the option to opt out, doesn't preclude (or reduce) consequences, (or rules). To think that opting out of one thing means you opt out of all things is incomprehendable. Unless you are imagining monopolies and other things that don't exist when nothing is mandatory?

[Anekantavad]

@SlaveryEvolves Let me put it this way. Some people seem to see society as a buffet at which they can pick and choose at will what rights and obligations they want, and leave behind the ones they don't (eg property, life, liberty are OK, but that's it).

Problem is, if it's a buffet, other people might choose differently.

IMO there's no buffet. You're a part of society, or you're not. If you're not, you can forget all about rights, including the right to life.

[SlaveryEvolves]

@Anekantavad It may be my lack of imagination, but I don't know what implications you are hinting at. Aren't 90%+ of our relationships and interactions like this already?

[Anekantavad]

@SlaveryEvolves Curious indeed. Opting out means (IMO) opting out. You are well and truly out. You owe nothing to anyone and vice versa. Nothing.

Think of the implications ...

[SlaveryEvolves]

@Anekantavad Depends on a lot of things. For the most part I'd say opting back in would be allowed, perhaps with a few restrictions (to avoid abuse) for a few special cases (like insurance). I don't think I'd want to define, even broady and roughly, what conditions might be. Curious.

[Anekantavad]

@SlaveryEvolves If you opt out, you have well and truly opted out, no? Or do you believe that one can decide what one will opt in and out of?

This is more important than one might think.