> "Wahtever accelerates memetic evolution", though, is a
>very broad description. ".
What I mean is, whatever accelerates the rate at which useful theories can
be generated and put into action.
>..[T]hat a new world government might be useful
>to redistribute wealth" seems only slightly memetic--I think D.H. is just
>preaching his <your message here>.
Preaching? It's just a theory which seems to follow from the memetic
paradigm.
>So, yes, a memetic version of complexity might be different from
>"laissez-faire competition"; in fact, it could be an elitist
>monopoly--distributing powerful memesets through non-resistent hosts--the
>masses.
So, you suggest that increasing memetic complexity could result in a
feudalistic state of informed elites controlling the uninformed masses.
Isn't feudalism a decrease in complexity?
>Memetic evolution would most likely be progressed greatly by acceptance of
>context, or issues, and non-acceptance of content, or special
>interest...that is, a memeset of issues with few memes representing
special
>interest would quicken the formation of new memes which would replace the
old.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Can you give an example of
context/issues and content/special interest?
>This might translate into <D.H.'s message here>, a new government which
>would involve grassroots efforts to make themselves known on a large scale
>through dissimination of information. From a top-down perspective (and
for
>someone who takes an obviously dim view of top-down politics, D.H. tends
to
>use this perspective quite alot)...from a top-down perspective, this would
>involve the established elite to redistribute information on a grand
>scale...or opportunity, or flexability...
While some memetic vectors are more powerful than others, I think that
memes spread more through a grass roots bottom-up process than through an
elitist top-down process. Do you just accept that there will inevitably be
this class division between the haves and havenots (memetic elites and
memetic masses)?
--David R.