Posted by Paul
(here)
Posted by Tesla_WTC_Solution
(here)
One of the problems in our society in terms of leadership is this:
the mentally ill are often predisposed to leadership positions because they require a lot of support (which leaders often set themselves up to receive).
We as a culture need to move away from these "pathological leaders" and foster the philosophy that everyman can be a leader.
Posted by Youniverse
(here)
I think what you're saying, Paul, is something like Thom Hartmann talks about in "The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight"? Hartmann talks about the success of the tribal model over tens of thousands of years. This system is no secret to many tribal groups and Indigenous people today.
All "great" (as in large and dominant, extending over 10's or 100's of millions, even billions, of people) civilizations that we know of on this planet have developed means to out live, and out extend, the natural limits of tribal organization. These organizational mechanisms have included royalty (the "crown"), priesthood (the "church"), politicians (the "nation"), and executives (the "corporation"). In each such case, something more complex and larger in scale than a tribe is established, that has sufficient self-sustaining, adaptive, replicating structure to persist, past the lives and personal reach of individuals, and past the tribal like bonds that we humans instinctively form (as do herds of cows and hives of bees and many other grouping animals.)
It's like comparing fungus with complex plants or animals. The essential replicating size of a "fungus colony" is small. The essential replicating size of a "tribe" is small. In both cases, more fungus or more tribes, one just has copies of those simple structures, replicated many times, covering a larger area.
Crowns, churches, nations, and corporations on the other hand are typically "larger" structures, with more complex interacting pieces, covering greater land, wealth and populations. They are like the tree or the mammal, having inherently larger numbers of cells in a more complex structure than does a "colony" of fungus. Fungus can grow on and depend on these larger units (on the sides of trees and whales), but the top level structure of "fungus colonies" remains inherently simpler than that of trees and whales.
The "tribes" that I've enjoyed being a member of (such as groups I've joined in the physical world or on-line) exist as does fungus on a tree. Perhaps there was sufficient abundance in my life from the larger world that I live in that I had time and energy left over, after tending to my food, water, shelter and clothing needs, to engage in other activities. Or perhaps as in the case of my Linux kernel hacking, there was sufficient abundance in the world of computer corporations that they can sustain, in a symbiotic way reminiscent of one's gut bacteria, a tribal like open source development model that's not inherently profit driven, within the larger "greedy" corporations.
It does not make sense to me to suggest that the major organizations on this planet, the crown, the church, the nation and the corporation, should be replaced with tribal model structures. The tribal model does not scale in size or complexity to handle the complex structures essential to the way of life of the seven billion people on this planet.
The present large scale organizations that can handle this population on this planet are sick;
however the small scale organizations that we know from personal experience can be healthy and sustainable don't scale.
How do we give birth to a large scale organization that's healthy? How do we even conceive of such an entity? How do we bring it up in the face of the instinctive opposition that existing large scale organizations will have to the existential threat of such an alternative? How do we do this before we have so devastated this planet that it once again is not capable of the abundance necessary to sustain such large organizations, for another long period of time?
Re: Who will lead the revolution, the civil disobedience?
Bookmarks