Re: virus: Re: Virus: Sociological Change (Anarchy)

Lior Golgher (
Thu, 23 Jan 1997 14:26:30 -0800

Kenneth Boyd wrote:

On Sat, 4 Jan 1997, Martz wrote:

> On Fri, 3 Jan 1997, Lior Golgher <> wrote:
> >One cares towards himself, his friends, his family, his values, his
> >life, his society\nation\tribe, and it's *all* self-interest. It works
> >fine in a tribe in which all knows all, but it can't work in
> >metropolines of millions of people.
> >Alienation is the problem of Anarchy, and in fact of all other regimes
> >too. Democracy isn't stable when you have statu\etnho-centric lobbies
> >within it which see for their own tribe's interests rather than those of
> >the whole. Fascism speaks of the 'nation' as an entity of its own and
> >Nazism of the 'race' in the same way. Both are popular because they give
> >oneself a solid status in his own tribe.
> This ties in with something I see as a potential stumbling block for the
> society I'm trying to outline. Mankind traditionally lived in a tribe.
> That tribe would have been small enough that its members were easily
> recognisable, as were non-members. Our population densities and societal
> structures now mean that each of us is a member of many different
> tribes; where I work, what religion I am, where I live, national
> allegiance, hobbies and interests, to name a few, all contribute to the
> often overlapping, and at times conflicting, tribal bonds we host. This
> has contributed quite positively to our technological development but I
> suspect it also causes internal conflicts (any thoughts?).

"Internal conflicts"? I think Dr. Milquetoast would use that term,

How many of us can say that our personality *doesn't* drastically shift,
depending on which of these "tribes" we are currently immersed in?

I'm assuming that memories are not being shifted by such immersion. I
know people where that fails outright; the results are truly interesting
[although I don't like associating closely with them....]


Kenneth is right. We have no major 'internal conflict' with us playing a
different character on each 'tribe'.
That shift isn't the problem.
We can't have a tribe which is made of millions of people. We can't even
have a tribe of a 100,000 people. I practically can't recognize the
members of my tribe when it's so vast, not to talk about caring towards
them. Most of them are absolute strangers to me, just like most animals
in a zoo would be to one of the Zebra there. Their lives is none of my
interest. That alienation is a problem. It stumbles all regimes. And
Anarchy is too weak to overcome it.