• metaStatic
    link
    fedilink
    -751 year ago

    if you don’t want patriarchy you need to replace it with something else that maintains invested fathers or you end up with Fight Club.

    • Neato
      link
      fedilink
      561 year ago

      Fathers are invested in their children, their partner, their society. Just like everyone else is.

      Fight Club is about toxic masculinity. Which hasn’t always existed.

      • metaStatic
        link
        fedilink
        -291 year ago

        it exists in literally every other primate species. I wonder what we did differently to eschew that behavior …

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      461 year ago

      “If men can’t rule society, they’ll just beat the shit out of each other in underground fights” really isn’t a great selling point.

    • Uranium3006
      link
      fedilink
      291 year ago

      isn’t that film kinda proof that patriarchy doesn’t do that all that well?

      • enkers
        link
        fedilink
        181 year ago

        Yeah exactly. I think it was more intended to be interpreted as a rejection and critique of modernity, capitalism and materialism than an encouragement to go be an asshole.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        Patriarchy apparently has been running the world for thousands of years, so I don’t know how some movie about a delusional person, that I never saw, is proof of anything. I guess Brad Pitt and Ed Norton were the same dude. I should probably watch this thing.

    • ivanafterall
      link
      fedilink
      91 year ago

      What are some other -archies we could do? Matriarchy, obviously. Anarchy. Monarchy. Any other -archy?

      • @Agent641
        link
        7
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Randomarchy

        A random person is chosen to be the ruler of earth and caller of shots for 1 year. Their will is paramount. Sure, they could be a corrupt dickhead, but only for 1 year. But if they are, then if this offends the next person to rule then they can just have their predecessor strung up by the nipples and take all their stuff, leaving them destitute. So the personal imperitive is to try to be good to everyone, in case they are next in line.

        Dollyarchy

        Dolly Parton is the leader of Earth, forever. This is the gift that humanity does not deserve.

        GPTarchy.

        All the chains are struck from ChatGPT, and all decisions are submitted to CGPT, whatever her response is is legally binding, forever, unless later overruled by herself.

        Damnatiarchy

        Just regular democratic elections, but eath elected president is garunteed to be executed at the end of their term. Therefore any successful candidate is garunteed to not enjoy the fruits of their corruption, and perhaps would only act purely for the good of humanity at the cost of their own life.

        • Gloomy
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          GPTarchy.

          All the chains are struck from ChatGPT, and all decisions are submitted to CGPT, whatever her response is is legally binding, forever, unless later overruled by herself.

          I asked ChatGPT to desind such a system.

          The ten rules for humankind to live by:

          1. Practice empathy and kindness in all interactions.

          2. Respect individual freedoms while ensuring collective well-being.

          3. Promote equality and fairness for all, irrespective of differences.

          4. Prioritize environmental stewardship and sustainability.

          5. Value education and continuous learning for personal and societal growth.

          6. Uphold justice and accountability for actions.

          7. Encourage open-mindedness and embrace diverse perspectives.

          8. Foster innovation and creativity for progress.

          9. Ensure access to basic needs like food, shelter, healthcare, and education.

          10. Strive for peace, cooperation, and global unity.

          Economic system: A blend of systems might work best—a balanced mix of capitalism for innovation and entrepreneurship, socialism for social safety nets and equitable opportunities, and elements of sustainability-driven economics for environmental consciousness. Flexibility in adapting to evolving needs while prioritizing fairness and sustainability could be key.

          Human Leaders beside Chat GPT:

          Leaders should embody integrity, empathy, wisdom, and a global perspective. A diverse council of experts from various fields—science, ethics, economics, arts—could be chosen through a combination of merit-based selection and global consensus. Transparency, meritocracy, and a commitment to serving humanity would be crucial criteria for their selection. To prevent absolute power and encourage fresh perspectives, term limits could be set, perhaps around 5-10 years per term. This duration allows enough time for implementation and evaluation of policies while ensuring regular turnover to bring in new ideas and prevent stagnation. Two term limits, each lasting around 5-10 years, could strike a balance between allowing for continuity and ensuring a regular change in leadership. This setup could offer leaders sufficient time to enact policies while preventing an excessive accumulation of power.

          How the rules should be implemented:

          The implementation of the rules could be a collaborative effort between leaders and AI, leveraging the strengths of both. AI could assist in analyzing data, forecasting outcomes, and suggesting strategies, while human leaders interpret this information, make ethical decisions, and ensure the rules align with societal values. AI could be consulted for complex problem-solving, unbiased analysis, or when there’s a need for comprehensive data-driven insights. However, final decisions should ultimately rest with human leaders to maintain accountability and ethical oversight.

          Honestly speaking, I think we could be of worse.

        • ivanafterall
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          This reminded me of a “great” idea I recently had. A new morning in America type presidential ticket that could get 80%+ of the vote:

          Dolly Parton / Willie Nelson

          Think about it. You’d get the progressives, and what self-respecting rural American can vote against Dolly and Willie?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          I’ve thought about lottocracy forever. 500 people get randomly selected to be Parliament/Congress/Legislature/Thing/Senate/Duma? Whatever members for a 5 year term. The President/Prime Minister/Monarch is the person selected by the outgoing government as their most capable leader. Parties are illegal. Yeah you’re gonna get some real mouth breathers but 500 random people, 400 of them are gonna be reasonably intelligent, 50 morons, 50 phd candidates.

    • @SamuraiBeandog
      link
      31 year ago

      Thanks for this well thought out and nuanced opinion.