10-03-2010, 10:52 PM
(10-03-2010, 10:08 PM)Questioner Wrote: This is where we disagree. From my study of history, I believe few human governments actually began with such noble goals. I believe the majority of human government began as naked aggression to seize power, coercion, violence and manipulation over other humans.
if we are talking about the history of post-atlantis age, ie, the last 10-11 k years, that is incorrect.
in neolithic, leave aside war, warlike actions, and anything relating to these, there were matriarchical societies, for example in eastern anatolia. these parts, and these dates, actually coincide with the domestication of wheat in human history too. there are numerous settlements like this in this period, leaving peacefully, and apparently worshiping various gods.
one is catalhoyuk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%87atalh%C3%B6y%C3%BCk
possibly, all this kind of organizations started as a collective, much like farmer's union etc.
for example, the understanding of governance and government, organization, remained true to these equal cores, in scandinavian cultures, until middle ages, even though the cultures themselves became quite barbaric, with the inclusion of an elected chief.
it depends on the region/culture. however, at the dawn of agriculture, such organizations were found, and they probably started in places where engaged in agriculture first.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6bekli_Tepe
this 12,000 year old place is interesting for example. it is the oldest known place of worship in history, and predates agriculture.
Quote:I find the open source analogy more helpful than the government analogy.
what difference does it make, whether it is a government or not, if the government is all of the people, all of them, equally and directly, including yourself.
Quote:David Wilcock likes to use the phrase "a hundred times more harmonious" than current 3D life behind the Veil. Where I come from that's a huge improvement. However, exploring that further would take us away from the original conversation about countries.
i do not subscribe to david willcock.