= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Will_BC comments on Open thread, 9-15 June 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (239)
Well, highly regarded as far as US politics is concerned. A lot of people here like to see military service in a politician, and it's considered to be somewhat above partisan politics. And doing what you're told is a meritorious characteristic to have in the military, although I suppose it's far less meritocratic than some other organizations, it's ideal is that it is. Although you're certainly right, I should have said my statements were framed in the context of the US politics.
I don't know about that. Quite a few of the people I know consider the US military to be the place where not too smart people go to learn how to obey and how to kill.
The topic of the discussion is voting systems.
That's probably a more sophisticated view, but I think popular opinion is with the military.
And the original topic was
And I think the military is similar in many ways to option two, sans the election part, which is why I brought it up.
Jesus is considerably more popular than the military. So?
"Sans the election part", LOL. But I don't see how it's similar at all. Option two is a bottom-up approach where authority flows up. The military is a standard top-down command hierarchy where authority flows down. The privates don't get a say in who their sergeant will be and lieutenants do not recommend majors for promotion.
Yes, Jesus is popular than the military, and more highly regarded in US politics by a majority of people. The opinions of the majority being of significant importance in a democratic political system. And certainly, there are differences. The direction of authority, which is what elections provide, is one. And there are others I'm sure I'm not mentioning, but those related to elections and authority are the biggest. But if you can't see how it's similar at all then you aren't being very charitable and aren't trying very hard. Both systems are hierarchical, both involve the promotion of a small number from a small group to another small group which then promotes a small number and so on until there is a small number of people or a single person at the top.
I am not very charitable and I don't see any reasons to try very hard. Any metaphor can be made to work with sufficient pushing, stretching, and averting eyes, but the question is why. Do you feel that putting up the US military as an example of a certain kind of voting systems provides some insight, some perspective otherwise unavailable? Do tell.
Well, the reasons to try hard are to be kind to others and to learn something yourself. Again, I never said it was an example of a voting system, what was asked for was a system of selecting public officials, and militaries are often public officials and it is not uncommon for them to change domains. The value is in taking a hypothetical system whose merits and weaknesses are difficult to evaluate, and comparing it to its closest analog in reality, which was my goal. I had come up with a system quite similar to the original query's idea, and the thought that it might be more effective in a top down fashion occurred to me, so it was even less different from the military than his idea, and both ideas fit the criteria of
There are a lot of political system where the power flows from the top down. Monarchies, dictatorships, etc.
Your example would be, I guess, a junta?
What I had in mind was more a hybrid between feudalism and the democratic process originally described. Democratic, bottom up above a certain level, top down below a certain level. But the idea was promoting a single person from a small group to a small group of similarly promoted people and so on ad infinitum, concentrating power by either process. I'm thinking of a system that could be implemented in practice.
I think Catholic Church works like this. The middle level is bishop -- positions higher than this are (at least were at some point of history) more or less democratically voted, functions lower than this are like in the military, they have to obey completely.