Which ideological mindset would you suggest in case of a rebulding after an apocalypse?

page: 1
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Yes, I would like to ask people from this forum. I assume that if any Mayan 2012 style apocalypse would happen, they would be overrepresented among survivors.

OK, the situation looks as the following:
You have approximately 1 000 000 like-minded people on a habitable planet. You had to escape from impending doom that endangered Earth.

Assets:
- natural resources - abundant
- human resources - not perfect match for your needs - survivors, not pioneers
- capital resources - terribly scarce, you were unable to take much stuff (let's say 30 kg of any reasonable equipment per person - so rifle - YES; motobike -NOT)
- food - so far can be hunted/fished quite easily, though moving towards agriculture soon would be necessary
- technology - nominally early XXIst century, though because of population number there is risk of regression
- people are dispersed on area not much bigger than Ireland (let's say 10 people/km2)


A discussion concerning future political and economic system started. Imagine you seat on a grasslike plants among survivors and eat some meat - how would you advice to rebuild society?

1) Political system? (direct/indirect democracy? centralised/federal? Anything else?)
2) Taxes? (or any other way to maintain state apparatus like each person is supposed to do work for collective one day a week?)
3) Money? (Gold or any other precious metal? Emitted by central bank? Ration stamps? Labour vouchers? Irrelevant in gift economy?)
4) Law and order? (How would police force look like, sentencing and punishments)
5) Form of organization of production? (Free market? Mixed economy? Centrally planed? Cooperatives? )
6) What about safety net? (and how terribly scare resources at start be protected against free riders)
7) Any other interesting laws suggested?
8) How to provide some kind of constitutional safeguards? (I think that some people claim here that there are some mysterious cabals behind. Neither confirming nor denying, I'd just ask how would you protect against such potential threat if were allowed to suggest law)


[I've tried to ask about it on Chit Chat forum, but neither I was convinced it was the right subforum nor it get special interest]
[I need input of such people for purposes of game scenario (RPG - GURPS 4). I want to have a question answered from your perspective.]
[I'm not asking in general, about such scenario, but one specific question - which kind of political system you would advice, if you had to rebuild world from scratch.]




posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 12:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Shadow1024

I like Anarchy.

Anarchy in that we have a society free of a publicly enforced Government. Based on natural law and respect for human dignity. It is a fallacy that we need some Government to provide for and protect us.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 01:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: Shadow1024

I like Anarchy.

Anarchy in that we have a society free of a publicly enforced Government. Based on natural law and respect for human dignity. It is a fallacy that we need some Government to provide for and protect us.
How do you decide what's the "natural law" and "human dignity"? (I mean how do you deal with problem that there is usually a kind of diversity of views) Do you prosecute criminals in any more subtle form than a lynch? (No, it's not intended to be offensive, I'm quite curious how should such system should work to make people under it actually happy)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 01:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shadow1024

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: Shadow1024

I like Anarchy.

Anarchy in that we have a society free of a publicly enforced Government. Based on natural law and respect for human dignity. It is a fallacy that we need some Government to provide for and protect us.
How do you decide what's the "natural law" and "human dignity"? (I mean how do you deal with problem that there is usually a kind of diversity of views) Do you prosecute criminals in any more subtle form than a lynch? (No, it's not intended to be offensive, I'm quite curious how should such system should work to make people under it actually happy)


I am not saying it should be enforced. I simply think any future system should be based on a very basic system of mutual respect for person and property. It is perhaps too idealistic, but hey, after an apocalypse maybe people would be willing to try something new in new world of possibilities.

ETA: My signature quote would be a good start...



Our freedom ends where the freedom of others begins.
edit on 2014/6/20 by Metallicus because: ETA



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 01:18 PM
link   
Isn't it ideology that got us here in the first place?

The problem with governance is that governance is chosen before anarchy can run it's natural course. Forget control, embrace the random, meaningless events that anarchy is until an equilibrium is reached. Do bad things happen when large numbers of people are in a state of anarchy? YES!

Everyone left after the smoke clears will be the strongest and the smartest. Forced eugenics will never trump natural selection.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 01:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mon1k3r
Isn't it ideology that got us here in the first place?

The problem with governance is that governance is chosen before anarchy can run it's natural course. Forget control, embrace the random, meaningless events that anarchy is until an equilibrium is reached. Do bad things happen when large numbers of people are in a state of anarchy? YES!

Everyone left after the smoke clears will be the strongest and the smartest. Forced eugenics will never trump natural selection.
So an effective warlord whose one of main talents is executing political opponents on high scale?
edit on 20-6-2014 by Shadow1024 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Mon1k3r

You appear to be confusing anarchism with libertarianism. The two are quite different, I assure you. The Social darwinism that you describe has *nothing at all* to do with anarchy (and in fact has nothing to do with reality or natural selection given that we evolved as a cooperative and altruistic species, but hey, that's off topic...).
edit on 20-6-2014 by Ismail because: he thought of something else to say



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   
I think you will see small clans and groups of clans building small, independent societies that can work together and grow into systems that work for them organically.

I don't think this would be a top-down thing but more of a bottom up. People will be scattered and just fighting to survive, and they'll find ways to make that work. It will be a long time before communities will grow beyond needing anything more complicated than a tribal style of governance.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 02:05 PM
link   
I think we should emulate some of the peaceful tribes of the Amazon.
Back to the Garden.
edit on 023030p://bFriday2014 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 02:08 PM
link   
First thing, plant potatoes, barley, and hopps.

Number two thing...... make homemade beer.

Third thing......make a still

Fourth thing....plant tobacco.

Fifth thing.....learn to make aspirin for the headaches.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Minding ones own business.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
I think you will see small clans and groups of clans building small, independent societies that can work together and grow into systems that work for them organically.

I don't think this would be a top-down thing but more of a bottom up. People will be scattered and just fighting to survive, and they'll find ways to make that work. It will be a long time before communities will grow beyond needing anything more complicated than a tribal style of governance.
Gotcha. So the same questions as in the first post of the topic, except that "for a small society that consist of a town and a few villages"?



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Shadow1024

Basically, I'm not sure what you want me to say. The situation will be unique for each group and will require more or less unique solutions depending on the area and the people involved. You describe an abundant situation, but abundance looks different depending on where you're at, how many people you're talking about, what kind of people you're talking about, and factors like that.

Are we in the desert? A desert can be a fairly plentiful place if you know how to survive in it, but it will impact the kind of society the survivors will build. You likely won't have sedentary farming folks, for example, unless they find a year-round oasis. Otherwise, you are looking at a tribal nomadic society. Maybe they herd hardy livestock like goats or they might make living carrying goods from other communities across the desert facilitating trade and base their culture around that ... or a combination of the two. Whichever it is, their cultural practices will grow up to reflect that kind of lifestyle, be shaped by it.

Not only that, but it will also matter what kind of people they were before the apocalypse happened. Like it or not, they'll carry that baggage with them and it will color who they become. So you will have to allow for that in your brainstorming, too.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 02:36 PM
link   
PS, however I think it will be more like mad max



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Lord Humungous would agree with you.



However not everyone would like to be ruled by Lord Humungous.

Anarchy breeds greedy butchers.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 02:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Shadow1024

Basically, I'm not sure what you want me to say. The situation will be unique for each group and will require more or less unique solutions depending on the area and the people involved. You describe an abundant situation, but abundance looks different depending on where you're at, how many people you're talking about, what kind of people you're talking about, and factors like that.


I want you to say (SHORT EXAMPLE) - Athenian democracy in village. Between assemblies everything ruled a tiny council responsible for emergencies, upholding laws, mitigating conflict and leading militia would operate. Each person above 15 years would be expected to spend one day a week working for the community. (especially needed for militia) Services provided by community is: militia, school/childcare for kids. Militia, when not used for fight would be just sent for public works.

When the situation calm down - write some internal procedures for management, maybe a simple form of taxation.

In long run - presumably create a federal gov with very little power - just for arbitration between communities, issuing common currency.

(Assuming of course, that in such situation you would advice such a plan)


Are we in the desert? A desert can be a fairly plentiful place if you know how to survive in it, but it will impact the kind of society the survivors will build. You likely won't have sedentary farming folks, for example, unless they find a year-round oasis. Otherwise, you are looking at a tribal nomadic society. Maybe they herd hardy livestock like goats or they might make living carrying goods from other communities across the desert facilitating trade and base their culture around that ... or a combination of the two. Whichever it is, their cultural practices will grow up to reflect that kind of lifestyle, be shaped by it.
Sorry for not clarifying that - temperate forests.
edit on 20-6-2014 by Shadow1024 because:



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 03:34 PM
link   
I think grey580 is on to something...

4...3...2...1...



It's one thing to wish upon a government, but I think the harsh reality of human endeavors is limited. Unless humans find a greater motivator (religion, aliens, spirituality, the Grand Poobah, etc.), we are all destined to repeat our natural inclinations derived from greed, selfishness, and natural selection. It's in our genes and in our minds to do so. I'm not suggesting I agree with it, but it's just the way I see it happening.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrflipjr
It's one thing to wish upon a government, but I think the harsh reality of human endeavors is limited. Unless humans find a greater motivator (religion, aliens, spirituality, the Grand Poobah, etc.), we are all destined to repeat our natural inclinations derived from greed, selfishness, and natural selection. It's in our genes and in our minds to do so. I'm not suggesting I agree with it, but it's just the way I see it happening.


The chance in such a case would be an elimination of any entrenched elite, either based on money or on proper social capital. So anyway you wouldn't see here a political solution, to make the system less pathology prone? (not utopian, just somewhat fairer and more reasonable)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 03:56 PM
link   
Work or be eaten. I think that would help get the ball rolling a little faster.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 05:00 PM
link   
True anarchy NOT the misguided / bastardized ideas that people think anarchy is.
Governments and leaders in all forms are whats causing the death of the world now.

Unfortuneatly humans are still far too primitive and barbaric to live in a true anarchist society.
So would be staying far away from them.





new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join