Democratic vs Dominance Hierarchy as a Spectrum

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Daniel Bitton:

"Because in politics the left refers to the people who support equality of decision making power, and the right refers to those who support hierarchies of decision making power.

And last time, we looked at the difference between dominance hierarchy, where the hierarchy is benefits the people on the top of the hierarchy, and imposed by them, vs. a democratic hierarchy where the hierarchy is formed for the benefit of its members, and where the people on top, only get to be there insofar as they benefit the rest.

In the future and we’ll look at how democratic vs dominance hierarchy is a spectrum, and how democratic hierarchy can morph into dominance hierarchy in the right circumstances – or rather the wrong circumstances – but what we need to understand today, is that while people might choose to establish a democratic hierarchy in order to achieve shared goals for the sake of efficiency, the idea that a society as whole would choose to establish itself as a dominance hierarchy does not make any sense. Dominance hierarchies are chosen by people on top choose it, and imposed on the people on the bottom, who at best tolerate it for lack of better options. And the level of dominance hierarchy is determined by the relative bargaining power of the two parties of classes.

Now, because people don’t choose to be stuck in dominance hierarchy on purpose – the existence of a dominance hierarchy can only be explained by particular circumstances which give some people certain bargaining power advantages over others.

And we saw that there’s basically only one general recipe for all dominance hierarchies – 1st, you need to have some people who are able to control access to resources that other people need – and 2nd, you need for there to be no preferable alternatives to get those resources other than to subject yourself to the commands of the people who control those resources."