Earlier quoted context omitted.
The logic behind it, I think game theory, is simple and does not just apply to democracy but any system of corporate or state government. It goes like this: Suppose there exist 2 parties to a conflict of interest. I want Z, but you also want Z, and this is a rival good, only one of us can have it at one time. Then it is possible for 1 party to play ball with the other party, but IFF there is a different, separate con…
Can you provide any links / reading related to some "other systems in G-space"? Sounds interesting.
This is obviously an enormous topic area. It is also a dangerous and highly contentious subject matter filled with many taboos, due to its nature and importance.
That said political scholars, like economists, have come to many consensus realizations. This is kind of amazing since Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are clones from a political science perspective, there exists a great diversity of thought.
This means that there is not as much of a gap between somebody like Francis Fukuyama and Moldbug as is popularly imagined. If you have a sincere interest in outcomes you find unexpected allies.
Here is a good start:
Volume 1: The Origins of Political Order by Francis Fukuyama Volume 2: Political Order and Political Decay by Francis Fukuyama
Seeing Like a State by James Scott
Exit, Voice and Loyalty by Albert Hirschman
The Problem of Political Authority by Michael Huemer
The Collapse of Complex Societies by Joesph Tainter
The majority of the time these authors are interested in outcomes, not in winning for whatever their home team is.
Outside of academia Silicon Valley itself is having a serious discussion on this topic from our perspective:
Balaji Srinivasan : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOubCHLXT6A
Peter Thiel : http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3EBfS9IcB4
Patri Friedman : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seasteading
Larry Page : https://techcrunch.com/2013/05/15/larry-page-wants-earth-to-...
Last but not least, the notorious Moldbug: Best explained by Scott Alexander : http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/03/03/reactionary-philosophy-...
If somebody is aware of an interesting line of thought around these issues I'll be happy to hear it.
One thing is perfectly clear and that is with the advent of the Internet we see the world differently and that this will lead to different forms of governance for the first time in several hundred years.
I also half seriously recommend you listen to audiobooks by Lovecraft to get into the appropriate mood for studying or reading about government.
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age."
I don't agree with his statement but it feels familiar after reading the books I recommended to you. This stuff has scale and is scary, the last person to seriously tinker with the subject on this level was Karl Marx.
That is why Patri's ideas may eventually win the day, but I leave you to it.