Interesting what a strange bend this conversation took.
It started out (I think) as an observation that what makes the Net
"work" is that it has a few very simple, very well implemented/enforced
rules (low level protocols) and a mechanism for layering higher-level
protocols on those and everything else is just "convention", confined at
most by "ettiquette".
I think there is a parallel between the self-organizing "success" of the
ecology we call the Internet and the self-organizing "success" of the
ecology we call "civilization". I "quote" success for both objects
(civilization *and* the Internet) because it is arguable, depending on
our measures about "what means success?".
Nick> It may be the Berkeley Relic speaking in me, but I have often found
Nick> "ettiquette" to be the next door neighbor of fascism.
Nick>
Nick> Do you all remember the "Sandwich Nazi" of Seinfeld?
<anecdote>
You may have meant it precisely this way Nick, but my own experience in
Berkeley (2005) was that the old hippies had all become extremely
authoritarian, and in some cases truly "fascistic".
A good friend (in Berkeley) supports the weekly activities of George
Coates ( http://www.betterbadnews.com/ and http://www.georgecoates.org/
) where he and a small troupe of actors slide into the Berkeley City
Council chambers right after the weekly City Council meeting and hold
their own spoof on the same... on TV! on the very same Berkeley Public
Access Channel station where the *real* council meeting is aired. It is
a spontaneous, just-in-time, ad-hoc, extemperaneous, ad-libbed
lampooning and spoofing of the very very Berkeley council. A hoot.
Too bad they don't air that on on the Internet.
</anecdote>
This observation by Nick reminds me that the conventional view of
politics (or personal values?) as a one dimensional spectrum from
conservative to liberal does not model reality well at all. The 2D
models such as the Nolan or Pournelle Charts provide a little more room
for having complex thoughts and experiences as human individuals and groups.
I find it interesting that in our general political discourse,
rhetorical speaking (and too often thinking) involves mis-ascribing
various values and motives. "Fascism" has become a term of slander.
Any perceived authoritarian or extremist position is generally labeled
"Fascist" and all too often, it is the extremist who finds all others
who don't agree with her, an "extremist".
I'm no fan of Fascism myself, but mere extremism or fundamentalism does
not capture the key features of Fascism that offend/concern me.
The key feature of Fascism for me is the nationalism and militarism
(more accurately, a belief that conflict is necessary). Fascism and
Communism alike have demonstrated to us some extremes in
Totalitarianism, but this is a consequence of their designed-in
Authoritarianism which is far from unique to Fascism.
As a Flaming Anarchist, I actually like Ettiquete, as it provides some
sort of guide to social acceptance that allows one to maintain ones own
sense of self, while knowing how to behave in different groups. Like
Tarzan of the Apes being able to become Lord Greystoke... could he have
ever pulled that off without Victorian Ettiquette?
Do we know of any ABMs that have been developed to interact and wander
about (self-organize) in the "Political/Sociological Landscape"? It
seems that Nick/Owen's MOTH (Myway Or The Highway) is a limited version
of this.
One of my attractions to modeling and simulation is that it requires a
different kind of rigor in thinking than more "conventional" analysis.
By trying to actually *build* a model, many well held beliefs suddenly
must be inspected closely and considered carefully in the context of all
the other well-held beliefs going into the model.
Imagine for example, what a 1-D political ABM would look like? About
all you might be able to show well is the mechanisms of bipolar
extremism and maybe a little bit about centrism. It seems like an
absurdly degenerate dynamical system, yet it is the basis for almost all
of our political rhetoric.
In the *real* human-value/experience (and by projection, political)
landscape, there are many more factors at work than mere beliefs about
economic and personal freedoms. It is an artifact of (somewhat) our
two-party system that we think one-dimensionally. Throw in the Greens
and the Libertarians along with the Cons and the NeoCons and the Dems
and the Socialists and the Communists and you begin to get a truly
interesting stew.
- Steve
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
