I don't know what the future of leadership is like but I'd love to see the 'Marduk ritual' enacted in the U.S. in Canada. Maybe not so religiously-specific in our spiritually diverse countries but just imagine if, say, during the State of the Union, the President had to devote time to telling everyone where he fell short of, say, adhering to his Oath of Office and recount everything he felt he did wrong (with prompting by others if they need to jog his memory). Imagine Biden having to do that. Imagine *Trump* having to do that. I would like to subject Prime Minister Trudeau and all future Prime Ministers to this.
The tragedy of the commons is the least of the potential problems with it. Paying with, as they say "your money or your life!" can be worth it to take those problems away.
I wrote on some overlapping ideas you might find compelling, applying the perspective of Joseph Henrich’s WEIRDest People in the World to BF Skinner’s behaviorist utopian novel Walden Two, to see how we operate in two social realms, one public and impersonal and guided by The Rule of Law (the WEIRD one) and the other more normal core human realm concerned with alliances, allegiances, and material gain. It’s the tension between these two systems that both burden us and make us free. BF Skinner’s fantasy was to eradicate one in favor of the other so our behavior would no longer be pulled in contradictory directions.
I very much appreciate and enjoy your blog; always enlightening!
In biblical religion, the most fundamental—and misunderstood—doctrine is the Kingdom of God/Heaven. It can be summarized as God's people living in God's place, under God's rule and authority, in God's presence, and with a human vice-regent as King. At the current time, the King rules in the midst of his enemies. Ultimately, Jesus will be the visible human King reigning over the earth. He is the model of a benevolent dictator. This is the great Christian hope for the world, not going to heaven when we die.
Exactly right. Christianity is very much that benevolant dictator and, even better, one who challenges us to be like God. The interesting things about the divine aspirations is that it forces us to look up to something greater than ourselves. It drives us to be better.
Converesly non-divine dictators don't insipire their followers to become better. The USSR and N Korea banned the divine and their nations wallowed in misery.
I just completed the book “Why Don't We Learn from History?” by B. H. Liddell Hart.
The statement below resonated a lot with my experience. It is not directly about a benevolent dictator but our desire to look up to someone, not an institution or a group of individuals, but a single person ( I generally use the word “Superman” who has all the answers to a problem or will save us from whatever the situation we are in):
“History shows that a main hindrance to real progress is the ever-popular myth of the "great man." While "greatness" may perhaps be used in a comparative sense, if even then referring more to particular qualities than to the embodied sum, the "great man" is a clay idol whose pedestal has been built up by the natural human desire to look up to someone, but whose form has been carved by men who have not yet outgrown the desire to be regarded, or to picture themselves, as great men.”
What I really like about the framing of looking up to the divine is that it achieves all the 'great man' tropes while also challenging us to become better ourselves. Buddhism is about continual learning to achieve and learn what the Buddha did.
Christian literally means to be Christ Like and the Old Testament Torah has its roots in archery as in aiming for and hitting a target of continual improvement.
This very much aligns with what I see in politics all the time. It's nice that you name it and it's actually empowering for me to consider it. I can let go of what I think I can control and see the systems for what they are and what they aspire to be.
I like the way you phrased it in one of the comments that a Divine benevolent dictator typically forces us to look up at something greater than ourselves while a mortal dictator typically lowers our potential
I'm not sure if anyone mentioned this in the comments, but what about "socio-cybernetics" as a form of governance? The concept of the human body. We know our bodies are made up of living cells that work unanimously to keep us alive, yet we our somehow we are one in control of a complex living body system.
Imagine residing in a "living" city. The roads are "alive", your car is "alive"; the entire city is looking out for you! (With the help of A.I./M.L. systems). A smart city, that will call the ambulance right away when it accurately predicts you are going to have a stroke or a seizure. Checkup on us when feeling "depressed" or emotionally unstable. Alert you to go to the nearest mechanic when something is wrong with the vehicle you driving before you could possibly fall into an accident or even aware of detriments within a vehicle. Would be interesting if we can build a village, town, or city, wherever one resides, the environment is looking out for you! Just a thought...
This idea I got from a deceased futurist by the name of Jacque Fresco, "socio-cyberneering" he called it, back in the 1970s. Interesting concept that never came to existence.
The thing with our bodies is that they are actually expert coded biological machines that we haveimited control over except at the macro level. Sam Harris and others makes a case that we have no free will.
In addition to your statement, what if a "perfect" AI built-in city systems, suddenly becomes "cancerous", just like how cancer in human bodies lead to death or suicide of the human body, where we have limited control. Imagine, that problem didn't show up in our lifetimes, but it did several generations later. Then that generation has to solve the problems of "removing" this cancer away from the "smart AI" city. How did a "cancerous" or corrupt A.I system came to be to begin with?
Post script - I started reading your book "Paradox". There's an event that got me puzzled, but I won't post on this thread, for that could be spoilers for anyone. Still curious where this literature leads me.
Great question. I think the first step is looking for and seeing where we have a dictator. As I was writing this essay I was thinking about divine vs. human dictators and realized that even the US has a dictator... we just attribute it to divine.
Knowing what you've got and being able to name it is the first step.
Then it's determining whether that dictator is manifesting the benevolence that you want. Even if it's parents, they too, can be tyrannical.
I like the idea of a divine dictator because they typically challenge you to aspire to something greater. They force you to look up. That's part of what I keep in mind when I consider selecting.
Right now, even our democratically elected leaders are fast becoming dictatorial in behavior. In the US it's the executive orders and more. To manage our human leaders from becoming tyrannical I think we need to do more ceremonies like Marduk! 🤣
This essay reminded me of a Taleb quote: “I am, at the Fed level, libertarian; at the state level, Republican; at the local level, Democrat; and at the family and friends level, a socialist. If that saying doesn’t convince you of the fatuousness of left vs. right labels, nothing will.” ― Nassim Nicholas Taleb, Skin in the game
I've always loved that Marduk story- what a great innovation to remind Power of Humility.
Yeah, I loved that from Taleb and was only slightly frustrated I hadn't codified mine formally when he published in 2017. It's been a mantra I held since 2008 when I was still in the Army. 🤣
I tend to agree. I might add: participatory government is VERY HARD. It requires vigilance and attention, two things most people can't be bothered with.
TL;DR: given the choice between liberty and convenience, I think I know what most people will choose.
Yeah. For me, it made me feel icky, so I knew I needed to understand the idea that there are folks out there interested in manipulation. Ideally, the book levels the playing fiend and ends up used for defense more than for offense, but I'm not at all convinced that's the case.
I don't know what the future of leadership is like but I'd love to see the 'Marduk ritual' enacted in the U.S. in Canada. Maybe not so religiously-specific in our spiritually diverse countries but just imagine if, say, during the State of the Union, the President had to devote time to telling everyone where he fell short of, say, adhering to his Oath of Office and recount everything he felt he did wrong (with prompting by others if they need to jog his memory). Imagine Biden having to do that. Imagine *Trump* having to do that. I would like to subject Prime Minister Trudeau and all future Prime Ministers to this.
I was thinking the same thing while writing this. It's a super healthy way to avoid tyranny and demagogues.
Giving away all responsibility is a great deal when you count up all the things you now don't have to worry about.
Maybe it's the East Asian in me but I am very down for benevolent dictatorship.
Exactly. Personal responsibility is messy. I don't mean that flippantly either.
The tragedy of the commons is the least of the potential problems with it. Paying with, as they say "your money or your life!" can be worth it to take those problems away.
Which is why we seem coded for it I think.
I wrote on some overlapping ideas you might find compelling, applying the perspective of Joseph Henrich’s WEIRDest People in the World to BF Skinner’s behaviorist utopian novel Walden Two, to see how we operate in two social realms, one public and impersonal and guided by The Rule of Law (the WEIRD one) and the other more normal core human realm concerned with alliances, allegiances, and material gain. It’s the tension between these two systems that both burden us and make us free. BF Skinner’s fantasy was to eradicate one in favor of the other so our behavior would no longer be pulled in contradictory directions.
https://amyletter.substack.com/p/obligations-of-antigone
Great essay you shared. Serendipitous we both released ours on the same day hitting on similar topics.
I know ! :) When I started reading your essay I was like… is there something in the air?
I very much appreciate and enjoy your blog; always enlightening!
In biblical religion, the most fundamental—and misunderstood—doctrine is the Kingdom of God/Heaven. It can be summarized as God's people living in God's place, under God's rule and authority, in God's presence, and with a human vice-regent as King. At the current time, the King rules in the midst of his enemies. Ultimately, Jesus will be the visible human King reigning over the earth. He is the model of a benevolent dictator. This is the great Christian hope for the world, not going to heaven when we die.
Exactly right. Christianity is very much that benevolant dictator and, even better, one who challenges us to be like God. The interesting things about the divine aspirations is that it forces us to look up to something greater than ourselves. It drives us to be better.
Converesly non-divine dictators don't insipire their followers to become better. The USSR and N Korea banned the divine and their nations wallowed in misery.
I just completed the book “Why Don't We Learn from History?” by B. H. Liddell Hart.
The statement below resonated a lot with my experience. It is not directly about a benevolent dictator but our desire to look up to someone, not an institution or a group of individuals, but a single person ( I generally use the word “Superman” who has all the answers to a problem or will save us from whatever the situation we are in):
“History shows that a main hindrance to real progress is the ever-popular myth of the "great man." While "greatness" may perhaps be used in a comparative sense, if even then referring more to particular qualities than to the embodied sum, the "great man" is a clay idol whose pedestal has been built up by the natural human desire to look up to someone, but whose form has been carved by men who have not yet outgrown the desire to be regarded, or to picture themselves, as great men.”
What I really like about the framing of looking up to the divine is that it achieves all the 'great man' tropes while also challenging us to become better ourselves. Buddhism is about continual learning to achieve and learn what the Buddha did.
Christian literally means to be Christ Like and the Old Testament Torah has its roots in archery as in aiming for and hitting a target of continual improvement.
This very much aligns with what I see in politics all the time. It's nice that you name it and it's actually empowering for me to consider it. I can let go of what I think I can control and see the systems for what they are and what they aspire to be.
I like the way you phrased it in one of the comments that a Divine benevolent dictator typically forces us to look up at something greater than ourselves while a mortal dictator typically lowers our potential
I'm not sure if anyone mentioned this in the comments, but what about "socio-cybernetics" as a form of governance? The concept of the human body. We know our bodies are made up of living cells that work unanimously to keep us alive, yet we our somehow we are one in control of a complex living body system.
Imagine residing in a "living" city. The roads are "alive", your car is "alive"; the entire city is looking out for you! (With the help of A.I./M.L. systems). A smart city, that will call the ambulance right away when it accurately predicts you are going to have a stroke or a seizure. Checkup on us when feeling "depressed" or emotionally unstable. Alert you to go to the nearest mechanic when something is wrong with the vehicle you driving before you could possibly fall into an accident or even aware of detriments within a vehicle. Would be interesting if we can build a village, town, or city, wherever one resides, the environment is looking out for you! Just a thought...
This idea I got from a deceased futurist by the name of Jacque Fresco, "socio-cyberneering" he called it, back in the 1970s. Interesting concept that never came to existence.
The thing with our bodies is that they are actually expert coded biological machines that we haveimited control over except at the macro level. Sam Harris and others makes a case that we have no free will.
I missed this replied post.
In addition to your statement, what if a "perfect" AI built-in city systems, suddenly becomes "cancerous", just like how cancer in human bodies lead to death or suicide of the human body, where we have limited control. Imagine, that problem didn't show up in our lifetimes, but it did several generations later. Then that generation has to solve the problems of "removing" this cancer away from the "smart AI" city. How did a "cancerous" or corrupt A.I system came to be to begin with?
Post script - I started reading your book "Paradox". There's an event that got me puzzled, but I won't post on this thread, for that could be spoilers for anyone. Still curious where this literature leads me.
That makes sense.
Something tells me that's a great plot for a dystopian novel!! 😜🤣
Human benevolent dictator all the way
Chances for that working out for more than one generation are low though. 🤣
Shame haha
I can see benevolent dictatorships becoming more and more popular 😁
I’m not a big fan of them though, call me old fashioned… 😉
We've had them for all of history. Democracy is an outlier on the world stage and quite new. Even Greece didn't really have it for long in Athens.
You’re absolutely right unfortunately.
Ah well it’s been fun to enjoy the blip..
Besides the obvious parental one, how do you propose selecting, accepting, etc. the dictator, benevolent or not?
Great question. I think the first step is looking for and seeing where we have a dictator. As I was writing this essay I was thinking about divine vs. human dictators and realized that even the US has a dictator... we just attribute it to divine.
Knowing what you've got and being able to name it is the first step.
Then it's determining whether that dictator is manifesting the benevolence that you want. Even if it's parents, they too, can be tyrannical.
I like the idea of a divine dictator because they typically challenge you to aspire to something greater. They force you to look up. That's part of what I keep in mind when I consider selecting.
Right now, even our democratically elected leaders are fast becoming dictatorial in behavior. In the US it's the executive orders and more. To manage our human leaders from becoming tyrannical I think we need to do more ceremonies like Marduk! 🤣
This essay reminded me of a Taleb quote: “I am, at the Fed level, libertarian; at the state level, Republican; at the local level, Democrat; and at the family and friends level, a socialist. If that saying doesn’t convince you of the fatuousness of left vs. right labels, nothing will.” ― Nassim Nicholas Taleb, Skin in the game
I've always loved that Marduk story- what a great innovation to remind Power of Humility.
Yeah, I loved that from Taleb and was only slightly frustrated I hadn't codified mine formally when he published in 2017. It's been a mantra I held since 2008 when I was still in the Army. 🤣
I tend to agree. I might add: participatory government is VERY HARD. It requires vigilance and attention, two things most people can't be bothered with.
TL;DR: given the choice between liberty and convenience, I think I know what most people will choose.
Very very true. That's exactly what I found myself.
What I like about a divine dictator is that it forces you to aspire to a higher, typically better moral, position as a default.
Yes! How do I become one of those?
Just claim to be one. All the cool N Korean Dictators have done that. So did the Pharaohs.
BRB, just finishing "48 Laws of Power."
Good book but often the laws contradict and typically they're exactly what business folks do that create so much drama and pain at work.
Yeah. For me, it made me feel icky, so I knew I needed to understand the idea that there are folks out there interested in manipulation. Ideally, the book levels the playing fiend and ends up used for defense more than for offense, but I'm not at all convinced that's the case.