From: Robert Coyote (coyyote@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Dec 25 2001 - 22:56:03 MST
re:
'2) They can restrict the people they take'
what if none will take you, or the only one to take you is undesirable?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chen Yixiong, Eric" <cyixiong@yahoo.com>
To: "Extropians" <extropians@extropy.org>
Cc: <Personal_Discourses@yahoogroups.com>; <sociologistics@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 8:35 PM
Subject: One Unity, Different Ideologies, all in the same universe
: Previously "One humanity, all in the same boat"
:
: A short note: We should refrain from saying "one humanity" because that
: would exclude alien species. I use unity in this case to
: mean all sentient beings.
:
:
: I would like to ask readers here to consider a world separated more on
: ideological divisions rather than mere race, geographical
: location and skin color (or other equally superfluous different). In this
: world, different communities abound where each community
: offers a unique ideology where one can subscribe to.
:
:
: One can choose to join any of these communities freely, and can start a
new
: one if neccessary. This provides free competition (in
: the uniquely productive rather than redundant sense). The communities will
: follow a non-interventionist policy what some basic
: important rules:
:
: 1) Communities cannot detain people who wish to leave
: 2) They can restrict the people they take
: 3) Those who choose to stay or enter without permission will subject
: themselves to the internal rules of the community (such as
: punishment)
: 4) Communities cannot interfere in the affairs of the other communities
who
: signed this treaty
:
: Given this, no dictator can rule his or her own people without having
: concern about them because these people can always choose to
: go to another community. Meanwhile, it does not deprive others of the
choice
: to join, say, this dictatorship because of certain
: (perceived) advantages that we might not consider rational (such as for
: religious reasons).
:
:
: Such a world would provide vastly more choice for all people than say, one
: dominated by socialist sentient AI (I mean this in a
: positive way!) or a world dominated by an anacho-capitalist society. We
: should not assume that people will have the same goals as us
: (such as the pursuit of self-interest) or even that they have no goals at
: all, but to provide them with choices such that they can
: choose their own path.
:
: This could stop a lot of conflicts from happening because if people can
live
: the way they disire, then presumely they would not need
: to fight for their "cause" whether we consider these rational or not. The
: exception, of course, lies with those whose ideologies
: require them to enslave or at least "take over the world". This could
cause
: some problems until a system exists to keep them in
: check (or wait until most people venture space leaving these people with a
: sparsely populated planet Earth).
:
:
: I suggest considering this approach of "many ideologies, many societies"
: over alternative approaches that champion any one of the
: proposed social systems. No shoe can fit everyone and we should learn that
: the easy, rather than the hard way.
:
: We should also have a wider prespective rather than the egocentric "my
: people", "my country", "my planet" and even "my species"
: thinking. This kind of attachment causes a lot of unneccessary problems
when
: they conflict with others thinking along similiar
: lines.
:
: Perhaps the first lesson any advanced sentient being can teach us, on
first
: contact, would consist of knowledge on how to live with
: ourselves. Technology will not serve us well if we only bothered to use it
: to build bombs to blast each other.
:
:
: For some additional ideas, refer to:
: http://sociologistics.webhop.org
: http://ascension.webhop.org
: http://eric.webhop.net
:
:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:12:50 MST