Aug 11 2008
Democracy as an Oligarchy continued.
In light of your responses I think its important to take into consideration the psychological issues humans generally have; our need to “know”, and the need to feel secure with our ideas. Thereafter framing this within the concept of spheres of influence.
I don’t think we will ever achieve a true democracy, unless strict re-workings of how we participate in our democratic system is made, however I do not mean to say the Oligarchy as we have it now is a poor thing.
After all those that are free thinkers are put into the position in which they can generate their own spheres of influence. An important decision that each individual should make is ‘do they want to create their own sphere of influence or follow anothers’.
This is not a simple good or bad question, after all I am contained within other’s spheres of influences such as the current Dalai Lama’s but am external, I believe, from most others. I think they can be useful, inspirational even.
The question is do you believe these spheres are justifiable; is it not necessarily a bad thing to be within ones sphere? And as well what are the limitations that you would consider justifiable of these spheres (ie the reasonable limitations of their inspirations)?
What do you think?
