RSS FeedSat 29 Mar 2008
A little over a week ago, I happened to read this post written by Dilbert creator Scott Adams that, while it may have some flaws, seems to be an interesting observation on the formation of âgovernmentâ. Although it comes off as being a political observation, it may be something better suited for the sociology department to take a look at than the experts in political science.
I am pointing out and linking to this article not because I find it to be enlightening about the current situation in Iraq, but because of how this process could be applied to many different aspects of life and society.
While I donât know if this would be the âbestâ method for peace in the Middle East or how long the process might take for that particular scale, I can think of several other situations where this phenomenon and/or its effects can be observed.
Small groups of people rally around those who have the power (strength, resources, money, etc) and the people in power begin to make agreements to protect their own interests. Eventually these agreements become interconnected enough that a central system of regulation of some sort has been created. Over time the central regulation system takes on a life of its own and becomes powerful enough that it controls the groups that formed it in the first place.
While Iâm not expert in the formation of governments, this does seem to be a fairly logical way for governments and other social groups to form and develop. At any rate, I have found The Dilbert Blog to be an interesting read.
RSS feed
| Trackback URI
| 
Send To A Friend
Scott’s insights into politics and the way things work are often right in line with how I view the world.
That said, I find the similies he’s cited to be quite interesting. I’ve often viewed Iraq as a nation that’s being asked to advance about 1000 years in social evolution within the space of a week. Naturally, this kind of radical change in thinking and politicking doesn’t happen overnight.
Is Iraq on the right track? I think that, in time, it will start to take a solid shape. That said, so long as a weak government is at the helm, there will be no real change from what we see now. The supposed leaders of the nation need to do just that: lead. Until they can start seeing the desert for the sand, they’ll never really accomplish anything of value.
That said, Sadr and others like him are certainly doing their part to live up to their political ambitions while also restoring some sense of stability in their own little areas. That said, one person’s stability is another person’s anarchy.
Hopefully the people of Iraq will come together, one way or another, to solve their problems and get back to being in control of their own destiny, regardless of what that is. I doubt it will happen so long as there are so many international interlopers, though
I agree that his insights on the way things work pretty much match my views on things much of the time.
This is definitely a topic that we could continue on about for quite some time, but rather than do that (since I agree with pretty much everything you said) I will just say thanks for the great comment!