By the toxic and destructive nature of the capitalist structure, it may not sound so hyperbolic to say that competition is the road to human extinction.
Networked - individual communities- seem the future of real democracy? The concept of networked individual communities as a foundation for real democracy is gaining traction in contemporary discussions about governance and civic engagement. Key points highlight why this approach is seen as a promising future for democracy decentralization of Power to local empowerment is trending. Communities network to allow for decision-making at a local level, empowering individuals to have a direct say in issues that affect their lives. The diverse perspectives decentralize power, offering a wider range of voices and perspectives. This trend can be included in the democratic process, leading to more representative governance. Requiring more civic engagement and an active participation. Individuals are more likely to engage in civic activities when they feel connected to their community and see the impact of their involvement. Grassroots Movements showcase networked communities fostering solutions addressing local issues, creating a more dynamic and responsive political landscape. The challenge seems maintaining uncorrupted communication on digital platforms. Those that mean to profit and harm this system will be a threat. The mechanism of a shared network would act as the central government does now? Dangerous in what recentralize ideology could become? Technology facilitates communication and collaboration among community members, making it easier to organize, share information, and mobilize for causes seem easily corrupted with misinformation? Access to Information: The internet provides access to a wealth of information, enabling citizens to make informed decisions and hold leaders accountable. But how to trust it? Collaboration and Solidarity Building Alliances: Networked communities can collaborate across different regions and demographics, forming alliances that strengthen collective action and advocacy. Misinformation would destroy this fragile fragmentation, how could there and what would they be, in safeguarding success for the greater good, and a moral center? Shared Resources: Communities can share resources and knowledge, enhancing their ability to tackle complex social and political challenges seem problematic? Resilience Against Authoritarianism Collective Action: Networked communities can act as a bulwark against authoritarian tendencies by fostering solidarity and collective action among citizens. I need to understand how this will work? Vigilance and Accountability: A connected populace is more likely to remain vigilant and hold leaders accountable, reducing the risk of corruption and abuse of power. Adaptability and Innovation Responsive Governance: Networked communities can adapt more quickly to changing circumstances and needs, leading to innovative solutions to local problems. Experimentation: Localized governance allows for experimentation with different democratic practices, which can be scaled up if successful. The future of democracy may indeed lie in the strength of networked individual communities. By fostering local empowerment, enhancing civic engagement, and leveraging technology, these communities can create a more inclusive, responsive, and resilient democratic system. This approach not only addresses the shortcomings of traditional top-down governance but also aligns with the evolving expectations of citizens in the digital age is fraught with humanity’s inherent disappointment
this approach could be the future of democracy, especially in a post-trust world where institutions are faltering. But it's fragile. Humanity’s disappointment—greed, tribalism, short attention spans—can sabotage it.
Still, hope lies in action. The "No Kings" protests, quiet as they may seem in D.C., represent a broader shift from spectacle to substance, from centralized control to networked, engaged citizenship.
Until you can discriminate between Natural vs. Unnatural Systems, your shooting yourself in the foot, because current Systems Theory has HUGE holes to fill. My Unified Framework for Systems Theory and my 8th Element - The Designer Query Discriminator provide a possible solution.
Dear Mr. Joseph, I put forth a proposal for my 7ES Unified Framework for Systems Theory, developed from 58 yrs of praxis trying to remove the image burned into my minds eye.
I think it is a possible solution to your Article. Certainly opening up thinking and discussion.
Sincerely, C. Alden, Independent Systems Theorist
Proposal for the Inclusion of the 7ES Unified Framework into Systems Theory
The monopolies that emerge from our present economies are good examples of how much more effective good collaboration can be even when confined to a corporate subculture. Monopolies would be great if only the diving purpose of those monopolistic corporations was the sharing and distribution of sustainable goods and services for the benefit of people and planet rather than the accelerating of economic inequality by maximizing profits for the richest 1%. We could eliminate poverty and hunger globally in no time at all as well as eliminating the forever resources wars and all the destructive "externalities" like climate change, ecocide and genocide. Competition really sucks.
A much easier way than looking for some non-existent system that could lead to the same failure as in the Eastern Bloc is to use cutting edge science to calculate the actual externalities and have them built into the price. That's what my friend says and he suggested that for a transitional period there should be dual prices, where the new ones would show the real one with externalities and gradually converge.
Things that worked for eons in indigenous / tribal societies, such as the free exchange of goods and services, should work similarly well in a larger context, given the right level of transparency and awareness.
If the following factors were taken into consideration, this analysis might sound quite differently, and the solutions would be more apparent:
- Deep transparency of each product (and it's ingredients) and how they were produced (a public platform on which each barcode, product and entity/corporation (and their actions and behaviors) can be observed/analyzed/rated/judged by the public and investigative journalists), and clarity about the true pricing / externalities of a product - ultimately people choose/vote with their money;
- Wisely implemented Pygouvian taxes (higher public awareness about how the profits are being capitalized and externalities socialised);
- Factors of disruption - as right now most giant monopolies are being disrupted and outpaced by smaller entities (especially if those monopolies wouldn't have the lobbying (/laws/systems) advantage);
- A radically different system of patents - making all patents publicly usable, allowing any entity to use a patent if it pays a certain minimal royalty, or something along those lines...
By the toxic and destructive nature of the capitalist structure, it may not sound so hyperbolic to say that competition is the road to human extinction.
It is, coupled with the fact that the system cannot find environmental balance.
How do we exit from the slavery ?
👏🏾OK, 👏🏾That 👏🏾part👏🏾
Nothing…the whole mess will destroy itself.
👏🏾PERIOD👏🏾
👏🏾PE👏🏾RI👏🏾OT👏🏾
It is self-evident that trade creates monopolies; mathematics explains why it is so.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-inequality-inevitable/
Networked - individual communities- seem the future of real democracy? The concept of networked individual communities as a foundation for real democracy is gaining traction in contemporary discussions about governance and civic engagement. Key points highlight why this approach is seen as a promising future for democracy decentralization of Power to local empowerment is trending. Communities network to allow for decision-making at a local level, empowering individuals to have a direct say in issues that affect their lives. The diverse perspectives decentralize power, offering a wider range of voices and perspectives. This trend can be included in the democratic process, leading to more representative governance. Requiring more civic engagement and an active participation. Individuals are more likely to engage in civic activities when they feel connected to their community and see the impact of their involvement. Grassroots Movements showcase networked communities fostering solutions addressing local issues, creating a more dynamic and responsive political landscape. The challenge seems maintaining uncorrupted communication on digital platforms. Those that mean to profit and harm this system will be a threat. The mechanism of a shared network would act as the central government does now? Dangerous in what recentralize ideology could become? Technology facilitates communication and collaboration among community members, making it easier to organize, share information, and mobilize for causes seem easily corrupted with misinformation? Access to Information: The internet provides access to a wealth of information, enabling citizens to make informed decisions and hold leaders accountable. But how to trust it? Collaboration and Solidarity Building Alliances: Networked communities can collaborate across different regions and demographics, forming alliances that strengthen collective action and advocacy. Misinformation would destroy this fragile fragmentation, how could there and what would they be, in safeguarding success for the greater good, and a moral center? Shared Resources: Communities can share resources and knowledge, enhancing their ability to tackle complex social and political challenges seem problematic? Resilience Against Authoritarianism Collective Action: Networked communities can act as a bulwark against authoritarian tendencies by fostering solidarity and collective action among citizens. I need to understand how this will work? Vigilance and Accountability: A connected populace is more likely to remain vigilant and hold leaders accountable, reducing the risk of corruption and abuse of power. Adaptability and Innovation Responsive Governance: Networked communities can adapt more quickly to changing circumstances and needs, leading to innovative solutions to local problems. Experimentation: Localized governance allows for experimentation with different democratic practices, which can be scaled up if successful. The future of democracy may indeed lie in the strength of networked individual communities. By fostering local empowerment, enhancing civic engagement, and leveraging technology, these communities can create a more inclusive, responsive, and resilient democratic system. This approach not only addresses the shortcomings of traditional top-down governance but also aligns with the evolving expectations of citizens in the digital age is fraught with humanity’s inherent disappointment
this approach could be the future of democracy, especially in a post-trust world where institutions are faltering. But it's fragile. Humanity’s disappointment—greed, tribalism, short attention spans—can sabotage it.
Still, hope lies in action. The "No Kings" protests, quiet as they may seem in D.C., represent a broader shift from spectacle to substance, from centralized control to networked, engaged citizenship.
Until you can discriminate between Natural vs. Unnatural Systems, your shooting yourself in the foot, because current Systems Theory has HUGE holes to fill. My Unified Framework for Systems Theory and my 8th Element - The Designer Query Discriminator provide a possible solution.
https://clintonalden.substack.com/p/clair-pattersons-legacy-and-the-cosmic
Dear Mr. Joseph,
Here is my case for why we should formalize the 7ES Unified Framework for Systems Theory.
https://clintonalden.substack.com/p/why-systems-theory-needs-a-unifying
Dear Mr. Joseph, I put forth a proposal for my 7ES Unified Framework for Systems Theory, developed from 58 yrs of praxis trying to remove the image burned into my minds eye.
I think it is a possible solution to your Article. Certainly opening up thinking and discussion.
Sincerely, C. Alden, Independent Systems Theorist
Proposal for the Inclusion of the 7ES Unified Framework into Systems Theory
https://clintonalden.substack.com/p/proposal-for-the-inclusion-of-the
The monopolies that emerge from our present economies are good examples of how much more effective good collaboration can be even when confined to a corporate subculture. Monopolies would be great if only the diving purpose of those monopolistic corporations was the sharing and distribution of sustainable goods and services for the benefit of people and planet rather than the accelerating of economic inequality by maximizing profits for the richest 1%. We could eliminate poverty and hunger globally in no time at all as well as eliminating the forever resources wars and all the destructive "externalities" like climate change, ecocide and genocide. Competition really sucks.
A much easier way than looking for some non-existent system that could lead to the same failure as in the Eastern Bloc is to use cutting edge science to calculate the actual externalities and have them built into the price. That's what my friend says and he suggested that for a transitional period there should be dual prices, where the new ones would show the real one with externalities and gradually converge.
Things that worked for eons in indigenous / tribal societies, such as the free exchange of goods and services, should work similarly well in a larger context, given the right level of transparency and awareness.
If the following factors were taken into consideration, this analysis might sound quite differently, and the solutions would be more apparent:
- Deep transparency of each product (and it's ingredients) and how they were produced (a public platform on which each barcode, product and entity/corporation (and their actions and behaviors) can be observed/analyzed/rated/judged by the public and investigative journalists), and clarity about the true pricing / externalities of a product - ultimately people choose/vote with their money;
- Wisely implemented Pygouvian taxes (higher public awareness about how the profits are being capitalized and externalities socialised);
- Factors of disruption - as right now most giant monopolies are being disrupted and outpaced by smaller entities (especially if those monopolies wouldn't have the lobbying (/laws/systems) advantage);
- A radically different system of patents - making all patents publicly usable, allowing any entity to use a patent if it pays a certain minimal royalty, or something along those lines...