RE: Don't Let Your Respect Create Hierarchy
Hi Luke! Thanks for sharing a little glimpse of a beautiful setting and what sounds like a valuable experience.
Interesting perspective you hold, and a popular one I'm sure. I disagree on some points which will be a way juicier conversation than just nodding along, so here we are:
To say that hierarchy holds us back is disempowering in and of itself.
Hierarchy exists. It's natural - there is biological diversity, there is a food chain, there is survival of the fittest. Hierarchy exists as much as gravity does.
To fight it, blame it, judge it, resist it is to create the conflict. Without that reaction to nature, there is no conflict.
Some people are better at this or that, some people are worse at this or that. Sure, we all have potential and we all have value and in many ways we're the same, but we're not all equal. IMO, this idea that we should pretend like we are all equal keeps humans limited and weak.
A functional organization puts the right person in the right position to perform responsibilities most efficiently and effectively - it acknowledges, accepts, honors, and celebrates our differences! Some people are better suited to be leaders, and some people are better suited to wash dishes - a functional organization puts each one in the right place for them to shine their brightest. Both people are important and add value to the whole, but let's be real about who carries more responsibility and stop pretending like equality is the ultimate measure of freedom!
Hey Sara! Thanks for stopping by and adding value to the conversation.
I find it interesting how so many valuable insights and suggestion for beneficial paths forward from one perspective also have echoes of the exact opposite approach. For example, when I met with @quinneaker and by extension you and @everlove (though, granted, in the case of Quinn it was mostly under inebriated circumstances), I encountered (from my perspective and frame of reference) a celebration of the ego and "god consciousness" in ways that, frankly, reminded me of narcissistic personality disorder. The very solution being suggested to improve the world (celebrating the power of the self) is condemned by others as a disorder.
Having given that example, back to the topic at hand. When I say "We're all the same!" it's clearly a generalized statement with many valid criticisms. Those who have experience various levels of shamanic experiences (which, funny enough, I have not) claim a new understanding of global connectedness and oneness with living things and a separation from the self and the ego (as to many buddhists and those skilled and meditation). Many argue this is a profound experience of healing that all should experience. It's from that perspective that I was thinking about the dangers of creating a separate class of leaders and idolizing them beyond reason.
I recognize the hierarchy in nature, but your argument, to me, seems like an appeal to nature fallacy.
Given what I know about the lifestyle you've chosen to live, I'd imagine this is the key point we disagree on. This is a point we may not be able to easily reconcile between us and yet I know you to be an awesome, amazing, genuine, loving, decent human being who will hopefully not let a disagreement (even potentially a fundamental one like this) come between our relationship and ability to communicate together.
I also agree that we are all different in terms of our skills, uniqueness, and value potential for the world. Some things can only done by specific individuals and those who find that path are truly doing something amazing, worthy of respect. But, in the same way, the masses who are doing other things (such as washing dishes) are also just as needed in terms of a functional whole and, from that sense, just as valuable. If no one washes the dishes and every gets sick and dies due to pestilence, that dish washing job all of a sudden seems really, really important (though it could be done by almost anyone, not just a special individual).
This, I think, clarifies where we may disagree. Leaderships (especially within western cultures) carries more visible responsibility and is therefore more highly celebrated. I get that and it makes sense. What concerns me is when it causes classism ("prejudice against or in favor of people belonging to a particular social class") because of the historical precedents we have for how destructive the hierarchies which can come from these perspectives are. Maybe if the things that cause those hierarchies to become destructive (such as the will to violate the NAP) were absent, then a "natural" hierarchy could be a beautiful thing. Maybe that's a level of enlightenment you all at the garden share which most the rest of humanity does not, which means, for the rest of humanity, it may be more helpful to be wary of hierarchies and mindlessly following and responding to "leaders" who impress us instead of thinking for ourselves. I agree with you there is conflict and struggle when we go against our (I would argue primitive) programming to think in terms of hierarchies. I think that conflict is healthy and once we come to peace with our connectedness to others, we can transcend it and find even more freedom.
That's just my current view, and I may be wrong, but it sure feels right and healthy to me to love everyone as human beings, even as I honor and respect those who are extraordinary.