From: "Michael Dawson -
> CB: Could you spell this idea out more ? I think of the essence of
democracy
> as more like self-governance. I think of the essence of humanity as more
> like sociality/kinship.
>
Michael:.. what I'm saying is that human consciousness would mean nothing if it didn't contain a degree of freedom. That degree of freedom is the power of choice. Nothing else in the known universe possesses this miraculous power. Nothing else in the known universe can understand and solve problems.
^^^ CB: Ok, I see. The first part of what you say above seems to be similar to saying that humans are unique in having free will, no ?
But are we sure that other animals don't have the power to choose ? Is it uniquely human ? For example, the choice of mates is famously demonstrated in the many species. Females choose the male with the best display , or whatever.
Might still be a virtuous power, but, not the essence of human. Or maybe you see some qualitative difference in human choice (as I see a qualitative difference in human sociality).
^^^^^^^
Humans can take care of each other and of other things. To the extent we learn to do this, life gets better and more enjoyable for individuals. We have much room for growth in this area. I believe it is the rational kernel inside the shells of all religions.
^^^^^ CB: Yes, this is like what I mean by the essence of humanity being socialty, and I agree that there it is a rational kernel of religions. Marx seems to sort of get at this by saying "God is alienated man (sic), i.e. humanity." maybe.
I guess you are saying we can take care of each other better when we have choice, (what I interpret as free will).
^^^^^^
At the practical level, the ability to choose between competing offerings of goods and services and institutions is the best way possible of discovering new and improved ways of living. It's also the only known check against elite power formations. Capitalists, after all, rule by ensuring that commoners have no say in industrial investment, production, and employment decisions.
^^^
CB: I can see logically that variation and therefore variety and thereby , maybe, choice are the only ways anything new could come about. Of course, if we _choose_ the old, the new won't be got. So, in a way, to get new things there is _no_ "choice" but the new thing.
Again on the elite power formation example, the elite power formation is not a choice we would choose , is it ? So, there is no alternative but the non-elite power formation. I mean it's like the "choice" between Socialism and Barbarism, or the choice between old age and death. Rosa Luxemburg posed a TINA before Margaret Thatcher reversed hers. The "choice" between Socialism and Barbarism (and now the third one, Extinction) isn't a choice. It's like saying we have no choice , but Socialism.
^^^
Yes, democracy is self-rule, but what does that mean, other than the ability to choose which collective arrangements you want to impose upon yourself?
^^^ CB: Yes, lets see. Assuming there is one collective arrangement that is the best or very excellent in one's opinion, then the existence of other choices not as good, doesn't add anything for you, does it ?
We could just as well say democracy is the ability to HAVE the collective arrangements you want to impose upon yourself. Self-rule is more like the optimum arrangement for everybody to do what they want to do.
^^^^^
I would point people back to Robert Heilbroner's observation that all human societies are ultimately composed of three things: 1) tradition, 2) command, and 3) free choices. Personally, I want a society that maximizes #3, minimizes #2, and ensures both tolerance and rational selection among elements of #1.
As to the idea, promoted by professional cranks like Miles, that this is all just ethnocentric prejudice -- well, I guess that's why Miles is living his alternative pre-modern lifestyle -- oops, he isn't, is he? All those who don't think modernity has bestowed many genuine gifts upon the race should be completely free to go live in some other way, of course. They will be mighty lonely.
^^^^ CB: I have to say that my impressions of Miles are not that he is a "crank", or somebody who only adds negative footnotes to what others say or whatever. I think he has a lot of worthwhile things to say about this subject and others.