Friam

Here's to the 1%!

Classic

List

Threaded

15 messages Options

Marcus G. Daniels

Here's to the 1%!

http://goo.gl/OcUVLV

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Roger Critchlow-2

Re: Here's to the 1%!

Thanks, Marcus, now we know how to get things sorted out here on FRIAM,

-- rec --

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:54 PM, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:

http://goo.gl/OcUVLV

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

gepr

Re: Here's to the 1%!

I couldn't help but be reminded of the "72 virgins" martyr meme in Jihad, as well as our own military (where it seems soldiers tend to be working class and officers tend to be middle-upper class) when I read this part:

> Ethnographic descriptions highlight that the sacrificial victims were typically of low social status, such as slaves, and the instigators were of high social status, such as priests and chiefs 3,4,27 .

Religious exaltation and economic relief might produce a pretty powerful combination for manipulating people into "taking one for the team".

On 04/05/2016 05:03 AM, Roger Critchlow wrote:
> Thanks, Marcus, now we know how to get things sorted out here on FRIAM,
>
> -- rec --
>
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:54 PM, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
> http://goo.gl/OcUVLV

--
--
⊥ glen ⊥

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Jochen Fromm-5

Re: Here's to the 1%!

In reply to this post by Marcus G. Daniels

It reminds me of the Aztec and Roman empires who sacrificed and crucified people. In the Near East some groups like the Phoenicians even sacrificed children.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sacrifice

I'm not aware of any human sacrifice in Ancient Egypt or Mesopotamia. The Egyptians practiced of course sacrifice for the gods and the dead in form of food. One could say sacrifices were an early form of taxes.

Jochen

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------

From: glen <[hidden email]>

Date: 4/5/16 17:13 (GMT+01:00)

To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Here's to the 1%!

cody dooderson

Re: Here's to the 1%!

My research on this subject is limited to reading the Lord of the Flies in sixth grade, but are there any parallels to modern mass incarceration?

Cody Smith

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:45 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:

It reminds me of the Aztec and Roman empires who sacrificed and crucified people. In the Near East some groups like the Phoenicians even sacrificed children.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sacrifice

I'm not aware of any human sacrifice in Ancient Egypt or Mesopotamia. The Egyptians practiced of course sacrifice for the gods and the dead in form of food. One could say sacrifices were an early form of taxes.

Jochen

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------
From: glen <[hidden email]>
Date: 4/5/16 17:13 (GMT+01:00)
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Here's to the 1%!

I couldn't help but be reminded of the "72 virgins" martyr meme in Jihad, as well as our own military (where it seems soldiers tend to be working class and officers tend to be middle-upper class) when I read this part:

> Ethnographic descriptions highlight that the sacrificial victims were typically of low social status, such as slaves, and the instigators were of high social status, such as priests and chiefs 3,4,27 .

Religious exaltation and economic relief might produce a pretty powerful combination for manipulating people into "taking one for the team".

On 04/05/2016 05:03 AM, Roger Critchlow wrote:
> Thanks, Marcus, now we know how to get things sorted out here on FRIAM,
>
> -- rec --
>
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:54 PM, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
> http://goo.gl/OcUVLV

--
--
⊥ glen ⊥

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Merle Lefkoff-2

Re: Here's to the 1%!

Try Germany and the Holocaust in WWII.

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 9:55 AM, cody dooderson <[hidden email]> wrote:

My research on this subject is limited to reading the Lord of the Flies in sixth grade, but are there any parallels to modern mass incarceration?

Cody Smith

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:45 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
It reminds me of the Aztec and Roman empires who sacrificed and crucified people. In the Near East some groups like the Phoenicians even sacrificed children.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sacrifice

I'm not aware of any human sacrifice in Ancient Egypt or Mesopotamia. The Egyptians practiced of course sacrifice for the gods and the dead in form of food. One could say sacrifices were an early form of taxes.

Jochen

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------
From: glen <[hidden email]>
Date: 4/5/16 17:13 (GMT+01:00)
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Here's to the 1%!

I couldn't help but be reminded of the "72 virgins" martyr meme in Jihad, as well as our own military (where it seems soldiers tend to be working class and officers tend to be middle-upper class) when I read this part:

> Ethnographic descriptions highlight that the sacrificial victims were typically of low social status, such as slaves, and the instigators were of high social status, such as priests and chiefs 3,4,27 .

Religious exaltation and economic relief might produce a pretty powerful combination for manipulating people into "taking one for the team".

On 04/05/2016 05:03 AM, Roger Critchlow wrote:
> Thanks, Marcus, now we know how to get things sorted out here on FRIAM,
>
> -- rec --
>
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:54 PM, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
> http://goo.gl/OcUVLV

--
--
⊥ glen ⊥

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
[hidden email]
mobile: (303) 859-5609
skype: merle.lelfkoff2

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: Here's to the 1%!

The intriguing thing to me is the evidence for coercion and religion co-evolving. Control mechanisms over a large population aren’t really feasible without manipulation. The violence is a tool to serve that purpose, but not the main instrument, authoritarianism. It must be that it takes some time to figure out how best to make people serve an imaginary master ,and chopping off some heads is an effective catalyst to get them thinking in the right direction.

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Merle Lefkoff
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 10:10 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Here's to the 1%!

Try Germany and the Holocaust in WWII.

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 9:55 AM, cody dooderson <[hidden email]> wrote:

My research on this subject is limited to reading the Lord of the Flies in sixth grade, but are there any parallels to modern mass incarceration?

Cody Smith

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:45 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:

It reminds me of the Aztec and Roman empires who sacrificed and crucified people. In the Near East some groups like the Phoenicians even sacrificed children.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sacrifice

I'm not aware of any human sacrifice in Ancient Egypt or Mesopotamia. The Egyptians practiced of course sacrifice for the gods and the dead in form of food. One could say sacrifices were an early form of taxes.

Jochen

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------

From: glen <[hidden email]>

Date: 4/5/16 17:13 (GMT+01:00)

To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Here's to the 1%!

I couldn't help but be reminded of the "72 virgins" martyr meme in Jihad, as well as our own military (where it seems soldiers tend to be working class and officers tend to be middle-upper class) when I read this part:

> Ethnographic descriptions highlight that the sacrificial victims were typically of low social status, such as slaves, and the instigators were of high social status, such as priests and chiefs 3,4,27 .

Religious exaltation and economic relief might produce a pretty powerful combination for manipulating people into "taking one for the team".

On 04/05/2016 05:03 AM, Roger Critchlow wrote:
> Thanks, Marcus, now we know how to get things sorted out here on FRIAM,
>
> -- rec --
>
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:54 PM, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
> http://goo.gl/OcUVLV

--
--
⊥ glen ⊥

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
[hidden email]
mobile: (303) 859-5609
skype: merle.lelfkoff2

Carl Tollander

Re: Here's to the 1%!

From this morning's news feed: " More people were put to death in countries around the world last year than in any other year during the past quarter-century, Amnesty International said Tuesday."

On 4/6/16 10:31 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:

The intriguing thing to me is the evidence for coercion and religion co-evolving. Control mechanisms over a large population aren’t really feasible without manipulation. The violence is a tool to serve that purpose, but not the main instrument, authoritarianism. It must be that it takes some time to figure out how best to make people serve an imaginary master ,and chopping off some heads is an effective catalyst to get them thinking in the right direction.

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Merle Lefkoff
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 10:10 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Here's to the 1%!

Try Germany and the Holocaust in WWII.

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 9:55 AM, cody dooderson <[hidden email]> wrote:

My research on this subject is limited to reading the Lord of the Flies in sixth grade, but are there any parallels to modern mass incarceration?

Cody Smith

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:45 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:

It reminds me of the Aztec and Roman empires who sacrificed and crucified people. In the Near East some groups like the Phoenicians even sacrificed children.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sacrifice

I'm not aware of any human sacrifice in Ancient Egypt or Mesopotamia. The Egyptians practiced of course sacrifice for the gods and the dead in form of food. One could say sacrifices were an early form of taxes.

Jochen

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------

From: glen <[hidden email]>

Date: 4/5/16 17:13 (GMT+01:00)

To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Here's to the 1%!

I couldn't help but be reminded of the "72 virgins" martyr meme in Jihad, as well as our own military (where it seems soldiers tend to be working class and officers tend to be middle-upper class) when I read this part:

> Ethnographic descriptions highlight that the sacrificial victims were typically of low social status, such as slaves, and the instigators were of high social status, such as priests and chiefs 3,4,27 .

Religious exaltation and economic relief might produce a pretty powerful combination for manipulating people into "taking one for the team".

On 04/05/2016 05:03 AM, Roger Critchlow wrote:
> Thanks, Marcus, now we know how to get things sorted out here on FRIAM,
>
> -- rec --
>
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:54 PM, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
> http://goo.gl/OcUVLV

--
--
⊥ glen ⊥

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

--

Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
[hidden email]
mobile: (303) 859-5609
skype: merle.lelfkoff2
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

gepr

Re: Here's to the 1%!

It seems to me that authoritarianism can be fostered without an organismic authority (like a king or priest class). Isn't the "rule of law" or a constitution intended to objectify the authority? If that's the case, then the psychological manipulation from things like religion or capital punishment can/could eventually become unnecessary to achieve an authoritarian state.

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Merle Lefkoff-2

Re: Here's to the 1%!

For those interested in authoritarianism, my favorite read is a classic published in 1993 ("The Guru Papers: Masks of Authoritarian Power"). I'd call authors Joel Kramer and Diana Alstad spiritual realists. The book is mind-blowing. I thought they were fearless when they later took on Buddhism, but I don't think they ever published the essays (I have a copy.)

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 1:36 PM, gepr <[hidden email]> wrote:

It seems to me that authoritarianism can be fostered without an organismic authority (like a king or priest class). Isn't the "rule of law" or a constitution intended to objectify the authority? If that's the case, then the psychological manipulation from things like religion or capital punishment can/could eventually become unnecessary to achieve an authoritarian state.

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
[hidden email]
mobile: (303) 859-5609
skype: merle.lelfkoff2

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: Here's to the 1%!

In reply to this post by gepr

IMO it is not the ratcheting or inertia in technical legal thinking that bothers me, it is that ultimately decisions still fall into the hands of a small elite, albeit a different one. If no one believed that judges can steer society to the left or the right -- there would not be fights between the legislative and executive branches over supreme court nominees for non-technical reasons. The law is also an elaborate tool for controlling (and helping) people, and unfortunately often one that can only be wielded by those with vast resources. Trade a pope for a supreme court justice for a Nobel Laureate at some level it is all the same. Everyone has a price. defining `price’ broadly. Sure I’ll pull from the right on that list if push comes to shove. But I’d also say authoritarian leaders, or those that like people like them, want some agility in their authoritarianism. They want to see the exercise of Power; they don’t want to be bogged down in procedure. Get those leaders and the led together and sometimes they’ll get behind some strange rituals.

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of gepr
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 1:37 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>; [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Here's to the 1%!

Carl Tollander

Re: Here's to the 1%!

In reply to this post by gepr

Well, constitutions are tools of the current narrative. Consider Article 9. It's pressed into service depending on the story various authorities wants to reify. One can consider what's on the paper and say oh that's pretty cool, but....

On 4/6/16 1:36 PM, gepr wrote:

It seems to me that authoritarianism can be fostered without an organismic authority (like a king or priest class). Isn't the "rule of law" or a constitution intended to objectify the authority? If that's the case, then the psychological manipulation from things like religion or capital punishment can/could eventually become unnecessary to achieve an authoritarian state.

gepr

Re: Here's to the 1%!

On 04/06/2016 12:50 PM, Merle Lefkoff wrote:
> For those interested in authoritarianism, my favorite read is a classic published in 1993 ("The Guru Papers: Masks of Authoritarian Power"). I'd call authors Joel Kramer and Diana Alstad spiritual realists. The book is mind-blowing. I thought they were fearless when they later took on Buddhism, but I don't think they ever published the essays (I have a copy.)

That's an interesting looking book. This review makes me want to read it: http://www.johnhorgan.org/the_anti_gurus_15278.htm

On 04/06/2016 02:01 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Trade a pope for a supreme court justice for a Nobel Laureate at some level it is all the same. Everyone has a price. defining `price’ broadly. Sure I’ll pull from the right on that list if push comes to shove. But I’d also say authoritarian leaders, or those that like people like them, want some agility in their authoritarianism. They want to see the exercise of Power; they don’t want to be bogged down in procedure. Get those leaders and the led together and sometimes they’ll get behind some strange rituals.

On 04/06/2016 09:19 PM, Carl wrote:
> Well, constitutions are tools of the current narrative. Consider Article 9. It's pressed into service depending on the story various authorities wants to reify. One can consider what's on the paper and say oh that's pretty cool, but....

Right. Both you and Marcus point out that any system can be gamed. And the winners of that game end up being the authority. And Marcus points out that even the authoritarians want the authority to be dynamic in at least some sense (each authority and authoritarian may want a different kind of dynamism, but that's OK). But the primary issue is, I think, not that an elite set of gamers exists (or will obtain eventually). The primary issue is the _size_ of the elite, either in absolute terms and/or in proportion to the rest of the population (including other species and the planet).

David Deutsch made this vague statement about good explanations being "hard to vary", in the sense that if you've got it right enough, precise enough, etc., then changing any given part of it, probably breaks it. You can't willy nilly change a good theory. You have to do it intelligently. The same would be said about an authority that was derived (as directly as possible) from the world, rather than being _imposed_ on the world.

Currently, any constitution is more "derived from the world" than any Monarch or Genius because our scientific understanding of the mind is paltry. So, a constitution, being a concrete artifact, allows _anyone_ who can make inferences from that artifact to play. Constitutions allow for a large elite class because they're artifacts in the world. If we could continue this process, making our constitutions more and more "of the world", then it could allow for larger and larger elite classes until, perhaps, the difference between those that can _use_ the law and those that are abused by the law is simply one of choice. If you put in the hours, you too can be a law user.

--
--
⊥ glen ⊥

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Robert J. Cordingley

[ SPAM ] Re: Here's to the 1%!

In reply to this post by Carl Tollander

Seems the question revolves around societies' morals. Jesse Prinz (a Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at the City University of New York) writing in Philosophy Now suggests that societies do not converge on a universal set of morals (unless driven by outside forces). Prof. Prinz goes on to discuss moral objectivism vs moral relativism and to justify the latter. So (it seems) what kind of state we tolerate depends on our shared and inculcated morality.
Robert C

On 4/6/16 10:19 PM, Carl wrote:

Well, constitutions are tools of the current narrative. Consider Article 9. It's pressed into service depending on the story various authorities wants to reify. One can consider what's on the paper and say oh that's pretty cool, but....

On 4/6/16 1:36 PM, gepr wrote:

It seems to me that authoritarianism can be fostered without an organismic authority (like a king or priest class). Isn't the "rule of law" or a constitution intended to objectify the authority? If that's the case, then the psychological manipulation from things like religion or capital punishment can/could eventually become unnecessary to achieve an authoritarian state.
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

-- 
Cirrillian 
Web Design & Development
Santa Fe, NM
http://cirrillian.com
281-989-6272 (cell)
Member Design Corps of Santa Fe

gepr

Re: Here's to the 1%!

In reply to this post by gepr

This article seems relevant:
http://evonomics.com/how-to-legally-own-another-person/

What he's describing as "employable" seems akin (though antithetic) to the concept of "taboo". The one element that doesn't mesh is the responsibility/accountability that accompanies freedom. The risks associated with an ungrounded freedom, including whatever grounding a monarch/genius might avoid tying themselves to, are always higher. What made the tea partiers and "new libertarians" so silly is their arbitrariness with respect to the authorities they admit and those they rely upon. When I was a libertarian, most of us admitted the fact we'd probably end up living in a broken van underneath a bridge. Our freedom was borne out of our willingness to give everything for the ideal. New "libertarians" are nothing more than slaves to the benefits they don't want to pay for.

On Apr 7, 2016 9:15 AM, "glen" <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 04/06/2016 12:50 PM, Merle Lefkoff wrote:
> For those interested in authoritarianism, my favorite read is a classic published in 1993 ("The Guru Papers: Masks of Authoritarian Power"). I'd call authors Joel Kramer and Diana Alstad spiritual realists. The book is mind-blowing. I thought they were fearless when they later took on Buddhism, but I don't think they ever published the essays (I have a copy.)

That's an interesting looking book. This review makes me want to read it: http://www.johnhorgan.org/the_anti_gurus_15278.htm

On 04/06/2016 02:01 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Trade a pope for a supreme court justice for a Nobel Laureate at some level it is all the same. Everyone has a price. defining `price’ broadly. Sure I’ll pull from the right on that list if push comes to shove. But I’d also say authoritarian leaders, or those that like people like them, want some agility in their authoritarianism. They want to see the exercise of Power; they don’t want to be bogged down in procedure. Get those leaders and the led together and sometimes they’ll get behind some strange rituals.

On 04/06/2016 09:19 PM, Carl wrote:
> Well, constitutions are tools of the current narrative. Consider Article 9. It's pressed into service depending on the story various authorities wants to reify. One can consider what's on the paper and say oh that's pretty cool, but....

Right. Both you and Marcus point out that any system can be gamed. And the winners of that game end up being the authority. And Marcus points out that even the authoritarians want the authority to be dynamic in at least some sense (each authority and authoritarian may want a different kind of dynamism, but that's OK). But the primary issue is, I think, not that an elite set of gamers exists (or will obtain eventually). The primary issue is the _size_ of the elite, either in absolute terms and/or in proportion to the rest of the population (including other species and the planet).

David Deutsch made this vague statement about good explanations being "hard to vary", in the sense that if you've got it right enough, precise enough, etc., then changing any given part of it, probably breaks it. You can't willy nilly change a good theory. You have to do it intelligently. The same would be said about an authority that was derived (as directly as possible) from the world, rather than being _imposed_ on the world.

Currently, any constitution is more "derived from the world" than any Monarch or Genius because our scientific understanding of the mind is paltry. So, a constitution, being a concrete artifact, allows _anyone_ who can make inferences from that artifact to play. Constitutions allow for a large elite class because they're artifacts in the world. If we could continue this process, making our constitutions more and more "of the world", then it could allow for larger and larger elite classes until, perhaps, the difference between those that can _use_ the law and those that are abused by the law is simply one of choice. If you put in the hours, you too can be a law user.

--
--
⊥ glen ⊥

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen