Summary

The web content discusses the complex relationship between statism and social cooperation, questioning whether one must choose between them and suggesting that human flourishing depends more on our approach to societal structures than the structures themselves.

Abstract

The article titled "Statism or Social Cooperation?" poses the question of whether we are forced to choose between statism and social cooperation, referencing Thomas Hobbes' view on human flourishing. It links to an opinion piece discussing the antisocial tendencies of the right and references the work of Graeber and Wengrow, which challenges the notion that statism is the best way to organize human life. The content argues that social cooperation's value varies with the context and intentions behind it. It also touches on the unknown aspects of our past civilizations, suggesting that our lived reality may differ significantly from our imagined reality, influenced by various cultural heritages. Ultimately, the article emphasizes that our intentions toward societal constructs like deities, family structures, and currency are more important than the constructs themselves.

Opinions

The article implies that statism is not inherently a positive force in organizing human life, as suggested by the work of Graeber and Wengrow.
Social cooperation is presented as a flexible concept, neither inherently good nor bad, but dependent on the actions and intentions it supports.
The author suggests that our understanding of the past is incomplete and that this affects our perception of current societal norms.
There is a critique of the idea that certain societal forms (like specific deities, family structures, or currencies) are inherently superior, emphasizing that the intention behind these forms is what truly matters.
The content questions the necessity of choosing between statism and social cooperation, proposing that human flourishing can be achieved through a thoughtful approach to either or both.

Statism or Social Cooperation?

Do we have to choose?

Opinion | Guns, Germs, Bitcoin and the Antisocial Right

What do these examples have in common? As Thomas Hobbes could have told you, human beings can only flourish, can only…

www.nytimes.com

Are statism and social cooperation the same thing? Will lack of either result in ‘nasty, short, brutish’ lives (see the column above)?

The work of Graeber and Wengrow suggests statism is no rosy answer to the issue of organizing human life. Social cooperation can be a good or bad thing (or anything in-between) depending on what you are trying to cooperate action around.

It turns out that no matter what form human life takes, it is our approach to it that will matter as much as or more than the form itself. We can have god (deity), family (patriarchal), and bitcoin (currency), and we will have that which is imagined.

The Lesser-Known Ancient Civilization Which You Have Probably Never Heard Of

There was a fifth river civilization along with Egypt, Mesopotamia, India, and China

historyofyesterday.com

Any lived reality is very different than imagined reality. We don’t even know what our past as a whole consists of. Is it Han? Is it Indo-European? Is it African? Is it Native to the Americas (north, central, or south America)? Is it central Asian as above in the medium article?

We probably always will have an idea about the deity who rules us, how our families should function and look, and what kind of currency we should use among us, but our intention with respect to those forms will take precedence over the forms themselves.

Photo by Srimathi Jayaprakash on Unsplash

What is our current intention by family, socially cooperative, and state group on Earth right now?