A government could be good. In theory:
- one year terms for elected individuals in public offices
- no second term
- getting elected is a random draw (akin to jury duty) based on the individuals’ capabilities
- authority limited in scope within city states
I’m sure there’s other ideas regarding this.
With 1 year and no second term they’re just gonna steal everything within their reach from day 1, so we need to balance it with:
- all public servants live under full transparency, 24/7 body cams etc for years after, financial transparency for life
- 2x to all prison sentences while serving
- a well-oiled practice to jail everyone who ain’t a total saint
Then, maybe.
It’d need to be a system that automates itself instead of needing surveillance. Something that simply disincentivizes corruption.
Some oppressors (indirectly, but essentially) started drawing lines one day and agreed that they would each get to farm the humans in their own territory.
Control goes back further than just territories to tribes. The tribe identity is only later tied to specific locations. Tribes formed because pooling resources burdens and learning was more efficient than doing it all yourself. From there, the tribes expanded and joined together and eventually settled into one location. So I disagree that oppressors just decided one day.
This was the case before countries existed. The territories used to be limited to how far the human cattle could walk, be productive and walk back home in day.
Freedom is only possible where the possibility of encountering other humans is negligible.
Whenever humans aglomerate, non productive humans require handouts to live. If they do not receive then they die. If they don’t want to die, they will steal. If the other humans resist, there will be a struggle and whoever wins becomes the state.
I think keeping population below 1 per square kilometer and spread out is the best solution to the state predation problem.
That’s probably the most polite disagreement I’ve ever had, I think I’ll save this comment !
1 per square kilometer is physically impossible unless you plan on finding a way to kill 7.9 billion people.
Earth has 146 million square kilometers of land.
It’s a neat idea but I think “the largest genocide in the history of humanity” kinda outweighs your solution.
About 64 million square km is habitable. Everyone stop having babies until we reach this number. That’s how we can have a stateless borderless utopia.
Whenever humans aglomerate, non productive humans require handouts to live. If they do not receive then they die. If they don’t want to die, they will steal.
Yeah, we know, politicians.
