Could we, as societies, artificially accelerate this evolutionary process in order to retain our hopes to survive? Could we synchronize our efforts to reverse our downgraded course into an unprecedented type of Evolution?

http://failedevolution.blogspot.gr/2014/11/revolution-evolution-or-revolutionary.html

All politics relies on the state's claim of a monopoly of the use of coercion. It is this fact that underlies all tax, law, policy and governmental action.

"a more advanced socio-political organizing."

The confusion of political with social is the same as confusing violence with non-violence, war with peace, freedom with slavery, and rape with making love.

You are also confusing biological evolution with social evolution.

"Two of the most significant revolutions in human history, the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution, brought historical changes in the socio-political field and set new possibilities for building more advanced societies."

Both of these revolutions caused political mass murders of huge numbers of innocent people. Doesn't that tell you something? Doesn't that make you question your assumption that this is a means to a "more advanced" social end?

They also ushered in such things as compulsory military conscription (enslavement) of the whole adult male population for aggressive purposes, total war, compulsory indoctrination of the entire population during their formative years, and the entrenchment of political privilege for the ruling class to live at the expense of the productive class.

To confuse this with some kind of "advance" is nonsense.

"French Revolution brought the nation-state as a carrier of majority's rights"

This only makes sense if you define "rights" to mean "whatever the government says they are". But this only means that the most powerful and aggressive party in society will decide what is right based on mere power: the opposite of rights.

Any political proposal, other than for the protection of liberty and property, simply means proposing to force or threaten people into submission and obedience so a ruling class can exploit them by violating their liberty or property.

It is simply intellectual and moral nonsense to allege that this makes society fairer or wealthier, and it doesn't matter how many brainwashed subjects, or priests of state-worshipping religions keep incanting their liturgy of blind faith in the state's superior goodness and competence.

Interesting.
The conflict between new ideas of sharing and the old ideas of owning as found in cyberspace will be the key to where our species ends up in the future. Will we end up as the dystopian hellhole many predict? With a tiny elite living in luxury while billions suffer? Or will we share the knowledge we as a species have built up and use it to build a sustainable future for all humankind? Either is possible.

There are many variables. The power of the elite and all their wealth versus the power of millions of now connected people. Nature and its response to so many people. New technologys and social trends that none of us can predict. Humanity's innate stupidity regarding war, pollution, waste, superstition and greed.
We wont know till we get there. We just have to do the best we can to educate ourselves and others to the realities of the world and ways we can fix at least our little bit of it.

I do know revolution is not the way. The rich and powerful might be the scum of the earth and treat their fellows with contempt but any uprising of the poor would see atrocities that would put isis in the shade. Then they would become the new oppressors and power mongers and the whole cycle starts again. Education, solidarity, direct action, mutualism and REAL democracy would be the best revolution we could have.

Sadly any further evolutionary progress for our species requires us to become a benign species.

Our inherited or genetic self interest can only lead to continued conflict. Good progress has been made over the last 10,000 years since we started trading Flint arrow heads for food.

Anther 10,000 years might do the trick, if we can survive that long?

If you really want to face facts, we have become far too soft for the species good.


All this namby-pamby stuff is slowly reducing our prospects for survival. Any rubbish about becoming softer & kinder is going further in the wrong direction.

The old law of the jungle, survival of the fittest served us well for tens of thousands of years. The strongest, or most able floated to the top, & took charge. The weak & the useless were expelled for the good of the whole.

Today medical science weakens the gene pool increasingly, by managing to support the incompetent specimens to breeding age. Given a couple of generations we will have a population where every person has asthma, diabetes, & a host more genetically inherited weaknesses.

It is this tendency rather than any warlike nature that will end western society, if not the whole race,

Yep, not a nice idea, but a simple unavoidable fact, like it or not.

JKJ, while you are quite correct in what you describe it is still a fact that those were merely the birth-pains of a new more equitable democracy, but as pointed out in the article, those democracies are now dying, poisoned and polluted by Capitalism and the failings and foibles of humanity.
The odds are high that it's all moot anyway, I figure Mother Nature is going to slap us upside the head soon anyway, we'll be back to hunter-gatherers if we survive at all.