I am now a double drop-out

[Montmorency]

Also, believing in something doesn't automatically means it exists.

As in, a social contract is something that can only exist by the virtue of being believed in.

Is undergoing power aka being ruled necessary to make progress?

Whether misguided or not, there is as I said a popular sense of innate authority. That does mitigate the exercise of power or coercion.

the shares will become fair, since everybody will only take what they need instead of piling up.

But can and could and would people accurately assess what their share should fairly be, assuming that it's possible?

Would everyone else agree with each other's assessment?

Is undergoing power aka being ruled necessary to make progress?

Is oppression a necessary tool to make society/humanity move forward and become more advanced?

Well, I'm not sure about this whole "progress" and "advancement" business, unless it includes the wholesale replacement of humanity.

I do think it's necessary for the maintenance of the current world-system and our current (relatively-high) standards of living - otherwise, we'd all just return to small-scale agricultural communalism, and the cycle would turn all over again.

[Andres]

As in, a social contract is something that can only exist by the virtue of being believed in.


Whether misguided or not, there is as I said a popular sense of innate authority. That does mitigate the exercise of power or coercion.

The word "misguided" is crucial. There is no free will, when you are misguided. There is no agreement, when one of the parties doesn't have free will. And thus, there is no contract.

But can and could and would people accurately assess what their share should fairly be, assuming that it's possible?

Would everyone else agree with each other's assessment?

We're talking about an utopian society in which people will just take what they need and in which the group will make sure there is enough for everbody.

If you exclude the selfish and the greedy, then nobody will take more. In such an ideal society, people would indeed accurately assess what their fare share is.

But as I said above, we will never achieve that state.

Well, I'm not sure about this whole "progress" and "advancement" business, unless it includes the wholesale replacement of humanity.

I do think it's necessary for the maintenance of the current world-system and our current (relatively-high) standards of living - otherwise, we'd all just return to small-scale agricultural communalism, and the cycle would turn all over again.

Ah, Montmorency, but perhaps returning to small-scale agricultural communalism would be, in fact, progress.

I believe it was the grand philosopher @Husar who once said in this very same subforum that humans just aren't fit to organise themselves in large societies. We are still not much more than cavemen. Cavemen with smartphones.

[Husar]

Ah, Montmorency, but perhaps returning to small-scale agricultural communalism would be, in fact, progress.

I believe it was the grand philosopher @Husar who once said in this very same subforum that humans just aren't fit to organise themselves in large societies. We are still not much more than cavemen. Cavemen with smartphones.

I have probably said that somewhere between a lot of sarcasm. It was the great googler @Lemur who once linked us to information about the Monkeysphere, an explanation of which can be found here.

Now I have never forgotten about the Monkeysphere because I think the more we are aware of it, the more we can attempt to mitigate its implications and work towards a working OWG. The natural restriction is just something we need to get out of the way just like our natural inability to fly...