Society

[Sandninjer]

Re: Society

@Zafra

I believe certain elements of society are creative and driven while there are other elements which aren’t. There are elements of society that rather profit from misery, resentment and anger. Society as a whole is a mixture of good and bad with a whole lot of people in between the two fending for themselves. If society was egalitarian one could of course assume that the basic human tendencies of humanity like compassion, sympathy and the desire to help others would be far more common. Moreover there are people who just don’t care. There is a level of apathy in society based on the notion of us vs them. This is not unique to society now as it is a normal part of human history. That is why gentleman like Edhi or women like Mother Theresa are so rare and why so many aspire to be like them.

Our society is based on materialistic goals and desires. In that regard with a capitalist model in mind those who prosper are the ones willing to risk to succeed and in many cases cut corners and with money and wealth comes power. I disagree with the idea that a “leader” is needed when African and Asian societies have always focused on leadership councils for various men from various backgrounds and ages to decide what is the best course of action for a society.

After all power corrupts but absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Zafra, I agree with what you said except the part I highlighted in bold but I think you missed some of what I’m implying. Which societies are you referring to? We don’t have egalitarian societies because frankly reality isn’t a Disney movie. Every nation has “leadership councils”, some more than others. Regardless, it doesn’t negate the fact that there’s still always one figure head behind every ruling party, every council, every committee. What would happen to the U.S. if we had no president? Pakistan? Russia? China? India? Again I argue that it’s human nature to elect a leader because it gives us some sense of unity.

Lets say martial law was just implemented and you, along with many others, decide to form a small and well-organized resistance. Now you can all form a committee and assign responsibilities and roles, but how long will that work out for you? What will your committee do when there are major differences amongst you? What makes you think that the Republicans and Democrats here in the U.S. would continue to work together without a president? There’s a high risk that your group will end up splitting apart due to major differences. Eventually, a leader would have to be recognized in order to maintain that the committee itself is also kept together and vice versa, the committee could also serve to keep the leader’s power in check. Leaders are meant to inspire, bring hope and unite people. It’s much easier for this to be accomplished with a single face. Why do you think specific presidents’ and kings’ faces were sculpted or painted in history when it was the common folk who mostly shed their blood? Because people are incapable of organizing themselves in ways that a leader, or leading council even, can.

Whether we discuss about a leader or a leading committee, regardless, they still go hand-in-hand. They’re both still leaders, but again, there is always a face who gets credited for such.

Do I believe that we should all be strong enough to fix our own communities’ problems? Yes, of course; but human nature tends to say otherwise.

@Exodus

Ideals. Couldn’t help but picture how different they ultimately could be.

If individuals do exist, like you said they do, give me one valid reason that explains why communities consisting of such individuals don’t?

I don’t agree we have just leaders today save for a handful, and even those few are denied the power they rightfully deserve. Today’s world is centralized by a system of corruption and greed with no room for the righteous-hearted. As for people being able to govern themselves, it’s impossible because we’re not perfect. We need leaders to look up to, no?