I am now a double drop-out

[HoreTore]

I'm not saying that I'm anti-government, I'm just saying that it is absurd that at some set point in time, we all agreed to be ruled by somebody else.

Why? Hierarchies are completely natural for our species(and many others).

Why is it any more absurd for us to have a government, than for the dominant male to lead a pack of wild animals?

[Andres]

Why? Hierarchies are completely natural for our species(and many others).

Why is it any more absurd for us to have a government, than for the dominant male to lead a pack of wild animals?

It is not absurd that there exists a ruling class. But it is absurd to state that we all agreed to be ruled. The ruling class just grabbed the power and governs the rest of us. Nobody ever aksed me if I agreed to be ruled and nobody ever asked my ancestors for their agreement neither.

We just happen to be ruled. There is no contract.

[HoreTore]

It is not absurd that there exists a ruling class. But it is absurd to state that we all agreed to be ruled. The ruling class just grabbed the power and governs the rest of us. Nobody ever aksed me if I agreed to be ruled and nobody ever asked my ancestors for their agreement neither.

We just happen to be ruled. There is no contract.

How is that different to a dominant male in the wild?

Is it absurd that we are forced to eat as well?

[Andres]

How is that different to a dominant male in the wild?

We humans are a bit more complicated and there are a myriad of levels of powers and people or bodies exercising it, but in the end, there's not much difference.

[HoreTore]

We humans are a bit more complicated and there are a myriad of levels of powers and people or bodies exercising it, but in the end, there's not much difference.

So then, do you find it absurd that the dominant female lion leads the hunt?

[Andres]

So then, do you find it absurd that the dominant female lion leads the hunt?

The dominant one might the most capable, but that doesn't mean she always acts in everybody's best interest.

Given our selfish nature, the dominant one will make sure to have the most comfortable live, at the expense of the other members of the group.

From the perspective of the individual, it is absurd to agree to be ruled by somebody else, since that somebody else will serve his own self-interest, which isn't your self-interest.

[HoreTore]

The dominant one might the most capable, but that doesn't mean she always acts in everybody's best interest.

Given our selfish nature, the dominant one will make sure to have the most comfortable live, at the expense of the other members of the group.

From the perspective of the individual, it is absurd to agree to be ruled by somebody else, since that somebody else will serve his own self-interest, which isn't your self-interest.

So.... You consider nature to be absurd, then?

Can't you then say that it's absurd to be forced to eat?

[Montmorency]

for those indeed capable of living without government.

If these are living with others "incapable of living without government", then I would argue that the former are indeed themselves incapable of living without government. Or are we talking about some sort of utopian society composed only of such high-class (in the other sense) individuals that they can all coexist in perfect cooperation and harmony? Cuz that sounds like communism.

From the perspective of the individual, it is absurd to agree to be ruled by somebody else, since that somebody else will serve his own self-interest, which isn't your self-interest.

It's good enough that they work in some proportion toward an interest other than self-interest. Of course, that leads to problems concerning empathy, but more importantly the status of the definition of the 'common interest'.

[Ironside]

I'm a year into an English literature course and i still dont know what post modernism is.

The shortest version: It's to challenge your preconceptions. What is art? Does it change on context? (Yes). In literature: Deconstruction, Meta concepts, etc are port-modernism.

Since it's oldish most of the good stuff coming from that has been mined out already.

The dominant one might the most capable, but that doesn't mean she always acts in everybody's best interest.

Given our selfish nature, the dominant one will make sure to have the most comfortable live, at the expense of the other members of the group.

From the perspective of the individual, it is absurd to agree to be ruled by somebody else, since that somebody else will serve his own self-interest, which isn't your self-interest.

Those who find it absurd to agree to be ruled by somebody else is called "my way or the highway" people. Try getting 3-4 of these to cooperate. Even most people who prefer to rule can accept getting ruled depending on the circumstances. It's an essential skill for a cooperative species.

Most of people prefer to be ruled because it's easier. Some never wants to rule, some only takes over a power vacuum or only rules when it interests them. The social contract basically boils down to what those who prefer to be ruled can accept, comparing to either being in power or trying to ursurp the power.

Rule 3 people and they won't accept that you don't do any work outside the planning. Rule 1000 people and most of them will accept that delegation.

Pay your taxes or try to rebel and survive the cutthroat hell if the rebellion is won.

[Montmorency]

The best way to ensure your representation, then, would of course be to seize the reins of power, destroy all traces of democracy, and rule as absolute dictator.

[Andres]

The best way to ensure your representation, then, would of course be to seize the reins of power, destroy all traces of democracy, and rule as absolute dictator.

In an ideal world, we would govern ourselves in mutual agreement.

But there will always be people who can't govern themselves and there will always be some who want to play boss. The worst people are those who belong in both those categories simultaneously.

Unfortunately, the majority of us hasn't evolved far enough to be able to live without somebody else telling them how, when, where and what to do, which makes lives sometimes unbearable for those indeed capable of living without government.