Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Tragedy of the commons

[Lyle Scheer (wonko]

Sharon Villines wrote:
> On Sep 27, 2007, at 7:44 PM, Lyle Scheer wrote:
> 
>>> I think not because the person can be overruled at any point -- and
>>> some people have been. People sort of cycle through jobs until
>>> something sticks.
>> I guess that means it's a benevolent easily overthrown  
>> dictatorship, but
>> someone has to be dictator.
> 
> I suspect you meant this humorously 

Yep.

>but in case this gets confused in  
> the minds of any readers of the list, a dictator is a ruler who is  
> not restricted by a constitution, laws or any opposition, one with  
> absolute power and authority, especially one who exercises this power  
> and authority tyrannically.

I was with you entirely except for the last part of that sentence.
Tyrannical exercise of power is nowhere in the definition of dictator,
and the "benevolent" part tends to offset the tyranny.

I actually think this sort of solution can potentially work well for
certain situations.  For example, I am my community's geek, and I've
been pretty much dictating the direction and flavor of our community
network.  Most others who have no knowledge or desire to get involved
seem fine to let me run with it.  I expect this to remain true unless I
dictate something that is entirely unappealing, such as some huge
increase in our monthly shared internet rates.

> Taking responsibility and exercising leadership is not being a dictator.

Correct.  Dictating a solution is, and I believe for the purpose of this
discussion the examples given were of people stepping in and dictating
solutions, with the rest who are overwhelmed or otherwise consenting to
abrogate their power by silence following along.

At this point, this is more of a grammar police sort of discussion, so
I'm stopping here.  My point is, even though you seem to be taking a
negative connotation of the word dictator, I don't believe that
connotation is really in the word.  Further, I believe our "democratic"
government tends to negatively connote most other forms of government
rather than look at them realistically and see benefits that could be
learned or taken from those forms of governance, and I'd rather resist
those connotations.

Sorry for the rant if this has become tedious to any of you.

- Lyle