Comment 30205

By Brandon (registered) | Posted April 17, 2009 at 08:23:45

As I have said before, a hierarchical system does not allow for true ideas or leadership to come through and with the hierarchical system threats, violence and intimidation are widely >used to thwart change and ideas.

And this differs how from a non-heirarchical system? It's not the system, it's the fact that you're dealing with people and their personalities, which is guaranteed to mess things up.

Imagine you have a revolutionary idea that's going to dramatically reduce costs and will take one person to run (you) instead of the current ten who run the old system. Do you really think that those ten will just happily accept being made obsolete and thank you for it? More likely that they'll just vote you down.

I saw a chart once that described the benefits or costs of different governmental systems.

The best was a benevolent dictatorship. One man decides, things get done and done right. Next was a benevolent monarchy. One main decision maker, but they have to appease the nobility who may have opposing interests. Then we have a benevolent democracy. Not much gets done and everything is compromise. Then we have malevolent democracy, monarchy and dictatorship, with the negatives blunted by the inefficiencies of the system or magnified by the time you get to a dictatorship.

To further complicate things, at the end of the day, everything is affected by the personalities of the people at each level of the chain.

I am disappointment in you're grammar.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds