Talk:The Meaning of Freedom

Some incomplete parts of the analysis are in my humble opinion in the following:

While a sovereign institution with limitless power may pull the subjects under it's rule out of the self inflicted barbarism in a seemingly perfect way because it gives no chance to conflicts between its subjects, it also has to be the supreme ruler in all things to do that. This on the other hand gives not only way to barbarism in an other way, specifically an "Iron Fist" Rule that makes conflict between it's subject impossible due to the use of terror, putting the subjects into a state quite similar to the one in absolute freedom concerned to it's fears. While in the case of a sovereign with absolute power conflicts seem to be solved quick and efficient, someone will always be the loser, as the conflict solution is by force. It also wastes a lot of potential as the subjects can not be allowed to decide anything by themselves. Thus I think the sovereign who forcibly resolves all conflicts inadvertently but inherently pushes its subjects into a state of lower civilization potential but massive collective security. A state of terror by the few is a distinctive possibility.

I can not agree fully with your view on the division of powers concept, which most of the time appears in democratic and republic systems. When the division is complete, the powers should not be able to vie for power. They each influence and control each other within a set of rules decided by the community. With the possibility of an overriding community vote, it can of course turn into a state of terror by the masses. Still in reality this happens rarely. (especially in CN where members can switch to another sovereign community rather easily) The division of powers may seem a bad decision in first light, but if it is complete, it actually lessens conflict. What may seem as endless bickering to the outsider is in most cases more a set of political trades. Conflict solutions will mostly consist in a trade off, leaving less potential to begrudge members of the community under the sovereign. Of course, this system is not perfect as well.

Overall creativity is higher for the division of power system, due to the members being confident that their voices change something and thus speak out more often, giving new information feeds and ideas to any discussion and planning. From an outside view though, the rule of a powerful sovereign seems strong and monolithic. Everyone knows that an attack will be met with force and will be met quick. The slow reaction time of the division of power system makes it vulnerable unless it has a set of rules, which suspend the division in a time of crisis.

Anyways, lots of writing and I am sleepy ;)