I have written a piece on the structure of society which I intend to expand and for which I would very much like the opinion of other free-thinking enthusiasts. In the end I intend it to show how we got where we are and where we could be going. Any comments would be greatly appreciated but the things I am specifically looking for would be along these lines:
- Holes in the logic
- Supporting citations etc.
- Presentation tips
- Alternative views and arguments
- Any ideas on how to develop the article
Please bare in mind that this section is not complete, hence a few [comment] boxes. That said I humbly present:
Talking Lions
Moore’s Law:
Every year, computers either become half the size, half the price or twice as powerful. I ask you to think about what information is required to come to this conclusion:
- The price
- The dimensions
- The power, e.g. the processing speed, the HDD capacity etc.
How much technical knowledge does one have to have to find and process this data? None. I could pick up a backlog of computer shop catalogues and write out a table of figures tomorrow and come to this conclusion*, however I cannot build a mother board or a microprocessor, I cannot write an operating system or read binary code.
*I am not sure of the validity of this “Law” and am only using it as an analogy, I may do this quite a bit.
This premise can be used as an analogy for all science. We usually decide on a set of laws for, let’s say, physics, before truly understanding what forces make those laws work, The process goes something like this: An object is examined and the observations there in are recorded , conclusions are drawn on the results and then a theory written which will become a law once all the pieces are in place. We may know that water melts at a certain temperature and boils at another but not know why. We may know that it does this because energy is respectively lost or gained by the molecules, causing them to either slow down to a gentle buzz or dart around and spread them selves out, but not know what exactly this energy is or what fills the space between these particles and so on ad infinitum. My point is this:
Science; it’s not an exact science.
Many of you may already know of the experiment being held at the LHC on the border of France and Switzerland. The aim is to find the sub atomic particle dubbed the Higgs boson or God particle. Basically a load of scientists have built a huge particle accelerator underground in which they intend to speed up protons to 99.9999991% of the speed of light thus breaking down the laws of physics that hold the protons together and reveal the Higgs boson, the (currently) theoretical particle that, while mass-less it’s self, gives other particles mass. This particle has never been observed and exists in the minds of scientists as a way of completing what is known as the Standard Model of Particle Physics. How did it come in to conceptual existence? Particles that could be observed were examined, conclusions drawn from the results and then a theory, which will hopefully [revise] soon become a law, was created based on the conclusions. The Higgs Bosen is the missing piece of the puzzle that only theoretically exists
If the Higgs boson is found to exist, fantastic! If not, one would assume that the scientists will throw up their hands, admit they were wrong and start looking for the true answer. If the theory is proven not to be empirically true, the theory will be abandoned or adjusted to fit what we know is true. Or in other word, when a piece of the puzzle doesn’t fit, find the right piece, or accept that it doesn’t exist and find a new puzzle. Don’t change the puzzle to fit the piece you cannot find. If only the rulers of our world thought more like scientists…
We are still no different from animals:
Seven lionesses return to the middle of their territory from a hunt, they find four males from their pride lying lazily in the sun. The dominant male helps himself to the first share. The other males bustle around taking small bites but he occasionally wards them off. After he finishes he will allow the lesser males to take their share and then, finally, the females have their turn. The most powerful have the most, the middle ranks; enough, the serfs; what is left.
Since the start of this power hierarchy not much has changed. This struggle for power is no different to that of the lion except for one thing. Lions fight for four reasons; first pick of food, first pick of females to protect their pride, particularity their offspring and also, to a lesser extent, comfort. It is said that this is just natural but I disagree. It is an empirical law based on one thing;
Scarcity:
Lions fight because they have to. Males want to mate with the most physically fit of the females because that means that their offspring are likely to be fit and continue their strong blood line and ultimately the species. Females do the same for the same reasons with the added bonus that by pairing with the dominant male she and her litter will be protected by him instead of attacked.
Lions fight for food and water because it is not plentiful and they require it to survive.
If lions lived in a world of gazelle roaming around in endless numbers freely offering themselves up, reservoirs never running dry, comfortable, safe areas to nest and all has access to appealing members of the opposite sex they would laze around contentedly and the power struggle would be over. Any lions wanting to maintain their position of power would need to stockpile and protect all the food, watering holes, nice places to lie and the females and this would be physically impossible for one lion alone to achieve. If he tried the others would overpower and either extradite or kill him and his power hungry traits would die, either in him or with him.
Now, let’s assume that the power hungry alpha-male lion is given the ability to talk and scheme with other pride leaders who have the same mentality. How would they achieve their goal? First of all they would have to take the food. If we assume that the social hierarchy is a simple pyramid structure that for every lion on the top tier there would be at least two underneath. It is hard to imagine that the alpha males would like the idea of taking on ranks of united, discontented lions that out numbered them more then 2:1 so how do they get round this? Simple:
Divide and conquer.
Imagine three lions in a head to head stand off over the last remaining trace of food; the alpha male is standing over the carcass and protecting it, each of the two pretenders have only one goal. Get the food for themselves. If and when the stand off breaks into an all out fight it will be in three directions, each fighting only for themselves. The smart money would be on the dominant male fending off the two other brawlers and taking the food off to stockpile with the rest of his ruling elite. If one of the others succeeded then they would simply take his place in the circle and nothing changes.
So, lets change the scenario a little: Let’s now assume that our two pretenders were able to talk and scheme themselves and their plan was this; set aside their differences and work together to fight the alpha as a united front. The divide and conquer technique becomes unsustainable. Assuming they were of an average to good build they would be more then capable of taking down their target and sharing the prize. The same technique could be used to take control of the other resources they aspire to own. Now another problem comes into the equation: Would the allied lions, having just defeated to alpha, be happy with the idea of sharing equally? They everything they need for themselves so why not? This is where the idea of instinct comes in for the lions are so used to fighting for power that they would carry on with their battle and end up with the exact same force-based hierarchy that existed before but with different leaders. Revolution of this type changes nothing because the figures that replace the tyrants are of the same mindset and still bent on keeping themselves at the top of the hierarchy.
Finally, we look at the lionesses:
The lionesses sit back and accept that none of them is ever going to have the strength to take on the dominant male. They are resigned to the idea that they are subordinate and must carry on with life at the bottom. Hunting and rearing cubs make up most of the role of the lionesses and they give up on the idea of taking any power from the males as soon as it comes to them.
Again, we will now give the lioness the ability to talk and scheme.
The social hierarchy pyramid puts the number of the females far higher then that of the males and once they decide to work together and the divide-and-conquer system breaks down they have the power to take on the males. However these members of the society have a new trick up their sleeves. They control some of the resources:
Food: The lionesses bring in all the food for the pride. If they all decided that they would as a unit go on strike and stop the food supply the lions would firstly grow angry and attempt to over throw them. When this fails due to the overwhelming power of the masses they have two options; give in and join the new society or leave and hunt for themselves. Firstly the would be pushed out of the pride land by those who they have opposed which seems a deadly fate but remember, they are living in a world of plenty so they would still be able to survive so no problems there. This brings me to the lionesses second position of power:
Reproduction: Even though the males may be able to eat, drink and be merry without the females they have no way of reproducing and natural instinct to reproduce and continue the race would be a huge factor in their decision as to whether to rejoin the society. Of course the lions have the power to withhold the same privilege from the lionesses and this would end in a new stand off centred around each factions stubbornness. This can go one of three ways:
1.The lionesses give in = Return to the hierarchy system of old
2.The Males give in = New system
3.Stalemate = No more little lions = extinction
Scenarios 1 and 3 require no explanation, their results are clear but what about the new system of scenario 2. With the lionesses in charge how would society fair? The first possibility is that the lionesses would just mimic the males and create a hierarchy system. The problem of this is that the lionesses require the power of greater numbers to maintain their position of power. If they continue standing united then their power pyramid will be upside-down with the few working to provide for the many. While this may seem unsustainable remember again that we are a world of plenty and so if they males worked hard enough they may be able to provide for their rulers. While this is an obvious improvement on the situation as the many, not the few have luxury it is still based again on the idea of keeping wealth from a certain part of the population in order to elevate the rest and lionesses just don’t think like that.
After a kill the lionesses are happy to share the spoils with one another and it is only when the males get involved that any conflict takes place. I see a pride run by lionesses in a world of plenty as one where all are allowed their equal share and all are able to pursue their one main goal. To live a long, comfortable life, make babies and ensure they have the best chance of survival in their world of everlasting resources.
So why, again, is it that lions do not live like this? Getting back to reality the lions world is not one of plenty. They are in a state of equilibrium with their environment. For instance, food: We will again use the example of gazelle being staple diet of the lion. If they gazelle have a boom in numbers then the lions will be able to support themselves with no conflict. Eventually lions will become more fruitful and their numbers will also swell. More lions mean more food will be required therefore more gazelle will be hunted, less will make it to maturity and mate and the gazelle population will decline leading to scarcity in the lion community and deaths as a result of either famine or fighting for food. The same model can be applied to the availability of the other resources and incidentally to all species of all types of life from the bottom to the top.
Now we get back to our world of talking lions and limitless resources. If the lions had the foresight to see the revolt? coming, how would the alpha males stop the lionesses from overthrowing their the corrupt system of created scarcity that they force upon them? Rip out their tongues. Without the ability to talk to one another the females cannot organize themselves to take on their masters and the only information they receive is from those above who are telling them. “This is the way it is. It is a good way, there is no other way and everything done is in the interest of the pride which really means the alpha and other males.” Any lioness who develops a voice and starts to speak against the lions will be either sent into hiding, converted or simply silenced. And the reason? To hack at the pieces of the puzzle of society in order to make the artificially created scarcity piece fit and complete the empirical law of hierarchy which is no longer natural law.
"And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.”
Genisis 11:6-7 (King James)