Re: [iucg] [discuss] Utopia was Re: [] Survey

[Elisabeth Blanconil <[e-mail]>]

At 19:15 05/03/2014, Jefsey wrote:
>At 11:15 05/03/2014, Avri Doria wrote:
>>Calling it Utopian, or worse, and deprecating it in various ways 
>>does not change that.  Sovereignty as currently understood has been 
>>a limited success - just looking at the daily papers and the 
>>movable permanent wars should be enough to convince anyone.  We 
>>need to figure out how to do better.  And this movement on the 
>>Internet, a new way for global society to interact directly, is the 
>>best alternative I know of at this point in time.
>
>Dear Avri,
>
>I am afraid you miss a fundamental point. Democracy appeared in 
>Athens. Its contribution was the "nomos", i.e. the law voted by the 
>people (actually some people). This nomos came in addition to the 
>Themis (natural law) and patria (families best practices). This was 
>a way to organise (architectonics) and harden the city from the 
>interior (cohesion among citizens) and be more structured and 
>prepared at the exterior. These tasks were distributed along three 
>archons: Eponymous (also the chief of state - Aristote introduced 
>architectonics, i.e. the architecture of all the architectures, as 
>the supreme political art),  Basileus for interior issues,  and 
>Polemach for external sovereignty (i.e. the field where only Themis 
>applies and your army can protect you against violence).
.
Jefsey,
this is a good analysis. However, the Themis was the natural law as 
seen by the Greeks. It included the gods, the lessons from greek 
history, etc. In the present case one could claim that the Themis 
equivalent is the current geek paradigm. This paradigm has been 
reworded by the I*people (RFC 6852). Do you accept it after your 
appeals due to your recent comments that they missed a final referent 
but that an MS principle could replace such a referent? Would the 
DNSA be an acceptable referent?
Hebe