Follow

Hierarchies disgust me. No one is my superior for the same reason no one is my inferior. If we cannot learn to make things work as equals, humanity will never graduate into adulthood.

@aral I've always felt the same so I've constantly been labeled as someone who has "problems with authority" ... yet I'm not the one who has a problem listening to the real "authorities" in a field climate change or so ... go figure

@aral probably need some hierarchy to address global scale problems.

@aral It's by far not the only thing we will never learn. 😒

@aral Whether they disgust you or not, they seem to have been around for a long time, and don't seem to be going.

Better questions: can we minimize them, prevent them from becoming dominative and make them serve everyone?

@douginamug @aral no they haven't. the current people at the top of the hierarchy would like nothing more than for those of us on the lower rungs to naturalize their superiority on their behalf like you just did. it's the modern version of the divine right of kings, and like that notion it's illegitimate and indefensible. stop carrying their water for them.

@walruslifestyle @aral hmm. Perhaps we need new language, because I've been working and developing a common house for some years now, and we have a hierarchy, in the sense that some people have enhanced decision-making power, but they can't give orders to anyone...

@walruslifestyle @douginamug @aral

the "naturalization of their superiority" aforementioned exists without formal structure. This has been theorized 60 years ago as the tyranny of structurelessness

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tyra

@jums @walruslifestyle @douginamug @aral
Whether humans are in general naturally equal or inequal is a longstanding question of philosophy and of anthropology; it doesn't seem to have a clear answer at present. Certainly some humans are better than others at some things, but do we naturally sort ourselves into leaders and followers? If so, then the question is how hierarchy can be arranged to serve the many and not just the few.

@jums @walruslifestyle @douginamug @aral

#DrJohnson claimed "So far is it from being true that men are naturally equal, that no two people can be half an hour together, but one shall acquire an evident superiority over the other."

But of course many people disagree.

@jums @douginamug @aral that article concerns a very specific attempt at a very specific type of organization within the greater context of a capitalist society. it has little to do with the point I was making.

@walruslifestyle i think the ball is now in your court to add something constructive to the thread ;p

@jums

@aral
Hierarchies also erase the interdependence of things and people. Needs to both ways.

@aral hmm I kind of agree - in the purest sense of the world, no one should be inherently better, or more important, than anyone else.

However, if there was no hierarchy, how do we differentiate between those who need to make big decisions on a daily basis? A person’s skill and experience goes into making them more adept at making these big decisions.

If everything was linear, who would make these decisions?

@kev

Recursive Committee's, committee one would decide at first, but then another committee would sit to decide if the first was right, however a third committee would take umbrage to the others decisions and call for a new super committee to be formed from the previous committees and itself, which then begins the cycle a new.

@aral
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Aral’s Mastodon

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!