1997-11-02 - Re: democracy?! (fwd)

Header Data

From: Steve Schear <azur@netcom.com>
To: Jim Choate <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
Message Hash: 7c08cfa9944f2728979afe93399d2659ac7257679f00a3bf7442b5105d83da02
Message ID: <v03102801b081a9259161@[]>
Reply To: <199711012333.RAA01954@einstein.ssz.com>
UTC Datetime: 1997-11-02 20:45:38 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 04:45:38 +0800

Raw message

From: Steve Schear <azur@netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 04:45:38 +0800
To: Jim Choate <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: democracy?! (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199711012333.RAA01954@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <v03102801b081a9259161@[]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

>> (perhaps old Iceland would be a suitable anarchy
>> to consider as a comparison).
>If it's so damn good how come it doesn't exist anymore? If it provided such
>a superior governmental system providing the maximum return on investment
>why did it go away? Why did they instead elect to go with a king? Futher,
>explain how such an anarchic system can be expanded without demonstrating
>the exact same sorts of scaling problems consensual democracies such as
>ancient Greek ran into? It's one thing to rule a few 10's of thousands of
>people who are related, share world-models and have limited resources and
>quite another to rule 4+ Billion people who speak hundreds if not thousands
>of languages and concommittent cultural beliefs?

So, a solution is to encourage (e.g., through technological means) the
break-up of nation-states into smaller geo-political groupings.