Divisive Example

anarchyI’ll try to make this as short as possible….

I am a member of two organizations where 30+ people are the democratic quorum needed to facilitate additions, modifications, changes or whatever, to the overall organization. We get along rather well, but from time to time, you can see a dividing line between two or more groups within the collective group. Upon occasion, two or more groups are seriously opposed. Votes are cast and the outcome may favor one group more than the other. Sometimes, one group completely loses its side to the argument. When that happens, I’ve seen a variety of different outcomes… dependent upon the seriousness of the situation, we’ve lost members because they did not get their way.

Let’s do a little theorizing here. Imagine the entire country is the same as my organizations, however, in the past, the information needed to get the dander up of the entire country really wasn’t there en mass, the way it is now. With the World Wide Web, information gathering is at our finger tips and instantaneous. Perhaps it’s not always *truthful*, but it’s there for the taking.

Most people don’t realize that when you get any size group of people, you will certainly be divided on different subjects and unless the organization is small and with good leadership, the divisiveness that exists over a particular issue may be too big to overcome.
It’s all about influence and spin, not truthfulness nor morality or ethics. If you can sway your point of view among enough of your clique, chances are, you can keep that influence going, even in light of more truthful evidence to the contrary.

I see what’s going on around the world today and I don’t see all of these groups of people in every country with problems, doing what they’re doing for the same reasons. Some of the reasoning, from country to country, is completely opposite. That being the case, how will this play out on the World’s stage when it’s all over? Will it ever be “all over” or is this the beginning to anarchy?

We have in this country, two completely opposite and extremely opposed views. Let’s use these as an example, liberal v. conservative. Both of these views come from seemingly intelligent people. How can intelligent people have such opposing views? More importantly, how can two such opposing and very wide-spread views expect to continue to survive?

There are those that will try to find the middle ground, however, there are also those that will NEVER conform to the other side’s opposing views.

Violence is besieging the limelight these days. It’s not decreasing, it’s only getting worse and it’s not particularly coming from governments, as we’ve seen in Egypt, Libya, Syria, etc. it’s coming from individuals, being led by other individuals and without government leadership heading up the chaos. In fact, I don’t remember in recent months, one single person being named as a “leader” of the rebels in any of the countries mentioned.

What does this all mean?

Are we in the beginning stages to global anarchy?

Something to think about, that’s for sure…..

/john

“…A pure democracy is a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person.” — James Madison