Thursday, February 24, 2011

Printable Map Of Dc Attractions

Anarchy



Recently I read an article in the latest issue of Wired a ' interview with Josh Klein speaks of the need to hack the social rules for a better world.

There is talk of ever increasing complexity of social systems and the fact that the responsibility to conduct the system falls on all individuals.

On the concept of hackers and content of the interview, maybe we'll come back in another post, I wanted to share some thoughts here and I have some conceptual links that are inspired by this sentence in the middle of the interview.
From this sentence I were born the first two reflections related to the complexity of the social system and the second related to the responsibilities of individuals.
Complexity orga reported that serves to "live" or "survive" a system or a type of social organization and "poitica" Understanding and responsibilities also in political and social life.



Here is the passage from the interview:

Q: Who decides what is wrong?


R: "This is a problem. In theory, there are organizations that try to understand it, but the increasing complexity makes a lot of responsibility falls on individuals, who must be able to understand what tools to use to judge the systems . "

Underlined text is the one that struck me and made me connect two things that were very distant at least for me.
The first connection I made was on the word complexity. The issue is that according to this theory, the arrival point at the end is the same, is how do you get that change.

Some 'time ago I had occasion to read a speech who made Ugo Bardi to Alcatraz in June 2009. Ugo Bardi is the president of ' ASPOItalia , an association that studies the peak oil.
In this conference there was talk of the collapse of the Roman Empire by finding similarities with the current situation.
In short, very simplified, the theory behind it is that a social system becomes more complex as it evolves until it can not make it to "support" this complexity because it consumes too many resources. And then the system collapses to find a simpler configuration that allows it to survive with the resources available.

We can only choose to make this more or less traumatic transition.

is where Klein's phrase made me take another connection: when he says that the responsibility falls on individuals.
This made me think anarchy is the second link that I did. Now I did not mean anarchy with chaos (if you want to know more you can see here , here and here ) but the absence of a central power. Absence power that causes people to be taking more responsibility .
Adopting the concept of Bardi (and beyond) and assuming therefore that our model of society is near collapse the question that arises is this: is possible that the transition is leading to the collapse of this system will lead to greater dissolution of a central government and greater individual responsibility? It is possible that the new company will be more "anarchist"?
And as you can get with a transition as painless as possible? And above all it is still possible for a smooth transition?
admit that this reasoning is a bit 'is a forced and especially my reasoning, but I wanted to share with you.

0 comments:

Post a Comment