tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3580247703206240142.post8292858627015816452..comments2023-05-16T02:08:42.858-07:00Comments on Degringolade: The Seven Billion Pound GorillaDegringoladehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11893964959960977677noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3580247703206240142.post-89181723504691223652008-08-25T17:56:00.000-07:002008-08-25T17:56:00.000-07:00Your point is very interesting. Freedom for one in...Your point is very interesting. Freedom for one in many cases infringes to some degree on the available choices of another. I believe it was Aristotle who pointed out that where there were more than 5000 souls trying to live together it would get harder to accomplish as the numbers grew.<BR/><BR/>We have cities with millions of people who mostly live like anarchists until the ordinances and limitations are brought to bear in some fashion. We have rules but most do not internalize these rules on a daily basis and usually wish to have them enforced when and if they feel their space is threatened and their choices somehow limited. <BR/><BR/>Controlling over 300 million people is not going to happen but a lot of strategies are employed to keep the number smaller. Divide and confuse, and a little racial divisiveness help to keep any real organized threat to the status quo in check.<BR/><BR/>As for resources I think most people only worry about getting theirs and do not even care about how long it will last. <BR/><BR/>But I differ in one respect with what you said I do not think there have been that many real freedoms present and I also do not think people were very aware of this. How many have read any part of the constitution? <BR/><BR/>Control can be benevolent or malevolent and I think what we are most concerned with is limiting the tendency for people to want more power and to abuse it.<BR/><BR/>Left to their own devices people would act pretty much as they do now, with a few bumps along the way.Michael Frenchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17929036456991115382noreply@blogger.com