A slightly out of context response but one that continues the flavour of what is being discussed in both the article and this post with perhaps some interesting turns. UNITY AND DIVERSITY. For Unity and Diversity to have real meaning the respect for all human beings must be paid special attention. This means that what everyone can contribute is valuable. At the moment the World Justice Movement(WJM) is a purely left wing experience and so is antagonistic towards right wing agendas. The left will mostly equate to state power and the right will equate to corporate power. Civic society is a phenomena representing people is it not. If it is then it is not permissible to be discriminating towards anyone, capitalist or socialist alike. What must be appreciated is that at our present level of evolution these two systems are the necessary prerequisites for our collective growth and that the two should be more integrated to form a moral type of capitalism and rational type of socialism. I call this type of analysis 'double duality'. Whilst it is appreciated that neither state nor corporate power are the most ideal types of governance, they are what we have to work with at present. To resist turning the WJM into a platform for unproductive belligerence and consequently becoming a satire of dogmatic and hypocritical polemism, the true and deep meaning of the words, 'UNITY AND DIVERSITY' have to be fully inclusive which means working with corporations rather than engaging in a time and energy consuming battle with corporate capitalists. The a priori of what I am saying is that it is people across the world who choose by virtue of 'individual social responsibility' to support capitalism and socialism alike. If the aim of the WJM is to create separation between the peoples of the world then in my opinion perhaps resources are better used on something that is actually trying to create peace and harmony rather than another version of hegemony. INDEPENDENT COUNCIL OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Under the protective wing of an globally and locally located organization called the Independent Council of Human Rights, the activities of both capitalists and socialists can be monitored in order that the liberties of humans across the world are protected. Ideally, nations would affiliate themselves to the ICHR and form territories of activity whilst at the same time giving humans free passage from one zone to another. In each of the different zones, individuals are able to live according to the set of principles that underpin that zone, whether that be socialism, anarchism, capitalism, etc. Due to state affiliation, resources are given to the ICHR which legitimizes its power to protect the human rights embodied in each zone whilst concomitantly allowing each state to retain its sovereignty. GLOBAL EQUALITY MOVEMENT. (GEM) Global equality or global justice cannot have any legitimacy if it only applies to half the people in the world; then it is only a form of sectarianism. Be very careful how words are used because words are magic and their misuse will invoke good or bad consequences. Rejecting capitalism despite all that this type of system has brought to many areas of the world is not to be wholly dismissed. To try and paint the picture that industrialists are evil is to cast the stone of ignorance towards whole sections of people who in their own way are trying their best to help themselves and others within the parameters of their own self-knowledge. Neither capitalism nor socialism per se are the absolute answers to the world problems but cooperation is. Is the WJM to communicate itself as a platform of cooperation with the different tribes of the world or is it a platform for hatred and disunity. People on both sides seem to have, dare I say it 'anger issues'. Displacing or projecting these on to the other side or not channeling these energies constructively is only serving to create walls of protection and defense rather than build bridges of hope. THE FUTURE. How are the peoples of the world going to be united in their diversity? How are we as individuals going to communicate and educate each other to accept that we all have a social responsibility to one another? How are we to apply concepts which we do not fully understand and hence how do we allow for our own ignorance in their usage? Nothing in life seems straight forward and the best of intentions turns against itself as a kind of economies of scale seems to apply to even the most abstract of concepts. For example, the notion of equality may have very favorable results in the first place in terms of balancing out huge disparities but this seemingly benign concept can be taken too far and equality becomes an enforced code of practice seriously limiting individual liberty and freedom of expression; all in the name of equality. Thus, balance is the key. THE VISION. Whilst energy is being wasted in conflict- intellectual, economic or otherwise, the important issues of how to construct a fair system and one that appreciates those hidden laws as outlined above are (conveniently) dismissed. In order for the human project to have vision we need all the available energy that we can muster. That is to say, progress will be made evolutionary when we allow the revolution to occur within our own hearts and minds. And what is the nature of this revolution that I speak of, it is the revolution of love. LOVE THYSELF AND LOVE ONE ANOTHER. Message was edited by: 03gwynst

Nicholas - First off, excellent paper, I enjoyed the attempt at quantifying what people usually just toss about verbally. But one thing I'm missing is how P2P networks might be essential for social beings to communicate one-to-one. It seems to me like people have been communiting one-to-one quite effectively for quite some time, and really our ability to communicate has actually decreased with the rise of all this technology, P2P networks included. I guess you have to ask: What type of communication? And with whom? And to what end? And what's happening to your communication with the "real world" while you're busy communicating in P2P networks? P2P seems like an effective alternative to traditional structures of distribution, so I guess I'd have to come down with Rainsford when she says that P2P could be a route to "embracing new and emerging values" that the technology may usher to the surface. Drew