We have examples of larger societies but they were not Euro-centric in their formation. You do have to look far if you are a North American.

The people of the Six Nations, also known by the French term, Iroquois [1] Confederacy, call themselves the Hau de no sau nee (ho dee noe sho nee) meaning People Building a Long House. Located in the northeastern region of North America, originally the Six Nations was five and included the Mohawks, Oneidas, Onondagas, Cayugas, and Senecas. The sixth nation, the Tuscaroras, migrated into Iroquois country in the early eighteenth century. Together these peoples comprise the oldest living participatory democracy on earth. Their story, and governance truly based on the consent of the governed, contains a great deal of life-promoting intelligence for those of us not familiar with this area of American history. The original United States representative democracy, fashioned by such central authors as Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, drew much inspiration from this confederacy of nations. In our present day, we can benefit immensely, in our quest to establish anew a government truly dedicated to all life’s liberty and happiness much as has been practiced by the Six Nations for over 800 hundred years. [2]

All three represent the failure of human scale. Do some states fail even when they are considerably smaller. Yes, but those issues vary. Take Cuba…that nearly failed after the collapse of the Soviet Union. That state mirrored that of its patron – Soviet Union – in how it conducted its culture and way of life. With the collapse of the USSR, Cuba regrouped and re-emerged a more sustainable state, one operating to scale.

There are failed states that are simply the aftermath of colonialism and the way in which those former colonies were left to have their natural resources, land, water, etc. extracted from the commons…from the people. In other words, these are states that may be scaled for a healthy human existence, but have been infected by the hierarchical organizing principles of larger empires. They are pseudo-states…or are like cancer cells that mimic their former colonial masters.

My argument is and has always been that scope and scale determine how much people can in fact “control” their state. It’s not a perfect measure but the best I’ve come across to date.

You also have said, “Do we want to be controled by corporate lords or by state?”
But isn’t constitution which allows corporate control part of the state? Nothing stands in isolation; thus, corporate control is a mere aspect of a state.
So is military, cia, fbi, media, etc. And when people talk about media or fbi they talk about these entities as if not parts of state nor the fact that media, cia, etc., people control possibly 95% of americans.
The 5 or 10% are are the state.
And all americans are people but not all are part of the state. Thus, the question is, shld amers be controled by all amers or just some?
Then, and only then are all amers are integral part of the state.

In concluding, people are not controled nor can they be controled by any state but solely by some people, most, or all people.
State is an entity on one level, people on another. So, we need to study first of all peoples’ doings and not detached from the state and all its instutions.
i don’t think i can clarify any further!

Liars, miseducators, clergy, pols are aware of this; thus, they will mix [compare apples with oranges] labels or substitute one for another, hoping people wld not notice the prestidigitation.

And i’d go on a limb and say that only one in 10mn people spot and understand what’s going on. And i was not one of those people till some geniuses had pointed it out to me.

We are, as these people say, a much more symbolic class of life than any biota; thus it matters much what an entity is called.
E.g., a spade is a spade it is not a digging tool or an instrument; killing children in afpak or palestine is not “collateral damage” but most likely willful murder. tnx

The tendency is to turn over to the State and thereby abdicating our Aengagement. In part, this is due, I think, to scale. As a nation-state continues to expand, as is true of the USA, it is impossible to govern in anyway approximating “for the people”.

Wars are built into expansionism. Smaller regional states built around a several urban economic centers and thriving city-regions is much more hospitable to human scale living.

Our problems begin with our trajectory to expand, to be a world empire, and thus to continue we’ve found it necessary to engage in endless wars, conflicts and general interventionism when the empire’s interest’s (which touch every where on the globe) are at stake. This is the result of not simply a “state” but a state which is the basis of massive population and expansionism.

If that is the problem, at least in large part, then it is not fanciful to look for solutions that match the problem rather than to flail over this or that ideology. The American empire must first be conceded as existing; then it’s problems eminate from this condition, as do the solutions.

Universal principles should be our guide rather than arcane notions that emerged out of industrialization; which includes the notion of the modern-day State.

World War–or this century of insanity, call it what one will–is, by all indications–scientific, ethereal, and in the human gut and the cries of wolves and songs of whales–about to heat up again, literally, as the glaciers melt in the Himalayas, wildfires explode around Los Angeles, a tsunami kills a quarter of a million in Asia, a hurricane destroys a major American city, and viral stupidity is passed on as memes from one confused and prostituted “leader” to another, and to the masses, and back up the food chain again.

So, if Richard Cook, who is ageless, if Michael Hudson, who is eternally young at 70, if William Blum at 75, and Howard Zinn in his 80s, now offer the fruits of their labor and experience to salvage a world for their children and grandchildren, and all children, let us consider ourselves fortunate for the work of such men and women who have maintained their brain cells and their hearts in good order.
History runs in cycles, and now we are in grave need of the timeless wisdom of Socrates, of Christ, of Lao Tzu and many other wisdom-seekers who bade us put humane principles first and to sharpen our minds.

For my money, the “Cook Plan” has a lot more going for it than the Rockefeller Plan, the J.P. Morgan Plan, the Rothschilds’ Plan–or any other plan of the global elite to subjugate billions of people, maintain them in serfdom and militarism, xenophobia, infantalism, poverty, the fear of poverty, paranoia.

It is clear that our present system of finance and control has benefitted fewer and fewer people and created mass misery around our shrinking, shriveling planet. We need radical surgery–and wise men and women to help us heal.

So it wld be quite clearer to ask, Are we going to be controled by corporate lords or [all] people?
Which automatically leads to a conclusion being interdependent appears a best way to be.

It is cristal clear that if do not interpret to any degree US constitution [and projected need for warfare; private insurers, media, educators, etc.] one is reduced to total dependency and near-totally politico-militarily powerless.

Once that is established in any land, one is confronted with ideal facist structure of governance. US fascim appears best ever developed.
This can be reversed nuch or partly only by the awakening of the dependencies.
And if the dependencies take this to heart and begin to demand a change
and, if necessary, engage in all kinds of passive massive resistance by the left and right, change wld come.
Alas, just last november 98% of the dependencies have voted for no change of that. tnx

I’m not pushing anarchy, though it and libertarianism should be much better understood. But these can intrude on problem solutions when we align more with ideology or party than solutions that are framed in other ways.

Mine is much more of a biological alignment. One can disagree, it is not a dogma, but rather a governing set of principles that seem closer to what we are, at our core, in the context of the life forces that are essential to that core. Beyond that we can debate systems of governance, ideologies, but again, I think the problems are fairly universal and can be undertaken with an authenticity of purpose rather than looking for an ideology to solve these problems.

Work was once joyful. Some 10-15 yrs ago all people worked; even children; and when asked to pick berries or go fishing, were delighted.
But once this idyllic social structure had been usurped; first by shamans and later clergy, from which megaland owners and other despots arose, most people hated not only the ‘work’ but their very existence, even the love of life ceased for many people.

This is happening now in US; possibly more that anywhere else because, methinks, US ‘democracy’ appears as best form of the usurpation i just mentioned and form of fascism.
more cld be said! tnx

Are you suggesting the State should own these things? It seems to me when people talk about Capitalism, they make up their own idea of what Capitalism is…and assume, too frequently, that the USA has a purely Capitalistic form of economics. This is just not so.

But what is more they never define the tenets of socialism as a viable alternative.

Human’s are wont to swing from side to side without real depth of clear critical analysis. Henry George, unlike Marx, was completely clear about the tenets of classical economics. Economics can be argued until the cows come home. There is no shortage of controversy mostly because there is no real economic system in place. It comes down to a hodgepodge governed by laws which allow Corporations, for instance, to have a kind of “personhood” and provide them with the power of citizenry with little of the accountability to the community. (Of course, there are moments of exception.)

But rather than looking a Socialism or Marxism and Capitalism as “good/evil” we’d be better off looking squarely at the problems and coming up with viable solutions.

The reason we find this so hard, I would add, is because our schooling has not provided us with this critically important strategem. I’ve been intrigued with the Land Institute that Wes and Dana Jackson founded. It focuses on deep problem solving. A little more of that, and a lot less ideology would do the human race a world of good.

Thus you have the fallacy of the middle ground. Just because it is somewhere in the “center” it must be “right” and herein lie the fallacy. Henry George got it wrong in the 1800′s and it’s going to be wrong thoroughly in the 21st Century. Hudson is extremely partisan especially when it comes to Marxism — which he is against. Marxism is much more sorely needed today than some derivative ideology that essentially maintains markets and Capitalism.

That right, right to own work and to do it in own time and own way had long ago been usurped by kings, lords, barons, and now modern patricians who own everything including the work.

No, i guess we don’t love our masters. I work every day and nobody needs to whip me to go to work or punish me for not going to work.
Slaving for s’mone else is not work but slavery! tnx

Markets exist. It’s that simple. How markets work or don’t work…is not controlled by market thinking or capitalism. Legislation/laws govern how things work or don’t work and for whom.

Monetarism is a bit arcane as it has become based more and more on debt – loans put money into circulation.

Decentralists, or those who see scale as core to the economic issues, think, money should not be issued by the Feds or banks but by local commerce. It’s a simple fundamental of currency. Currency is not just a means of exchange, but currency value should reflect trade balances. National currency does NOT do that. It creates a chaos in the markets and in understand trade balance. US aggregate trade deficits do not speak to San Franscio’s trade balance. It distorts SF’s TB by demanding that the aggregate US deficit be reflected in the value of USD, which has almost NOTHING to do with SF’s economy.

Hudson has a Georgist strain which is what I find most valuable about some of his solutions.