Liberty, Freedom and Democracy: Paradox for an Extraterrestrial Society

Abstract

Human society is built on an evolving set of structures and is therefore cradled within a range of imperatives largely independent of design—the way humans interact is dependent on the circumstances at each phase of its evolution, with the determinates set by the particular set of interactions prevalent at specific points in the chronological evolution of humans. The interrelationship of physical and social evolution is traditionally explained within the separate fields of physical and social anthropology. It is the premise here that humans will react according to their relative stages of evolution and that reactions at one stage cannot be a prerequisite for reactions at another: while the physical evolution of a Greek of the 5th century BC was every bit as developed as that in a modern Greek, the evolving social anthropological model meant that the Greek today would not respond in the way she or he would 2,500 years ago. The fully developed Homo sapiens brain is capable of reforming according to the influences of a continuously evolving social structure and this will play a vital role in any extraterrestrial society. The author proposes that we are unable to predict how liberty, freedom and democracy will feature in an extraterrestrial society because we cannot know how these bedrocks of civilization will be regarded in the future time when such a society will be formed. It is assumed that not for at least 100 years will humans create such a society. Here, an extraterrestrial society is one assumed to be completely separate from Earth societies in both contact and accessibility and therefore unique—without precedent or parallel. The conclusion of this thesis is that an extraterrestrial society may choose not to limit itself to the accepted norms of liberty, freedom and democracy as defined by humans in societies on Earth. It may feel that the various interpretations of their application are lessons to be learned by way of avoiding what it may view as irrational methods of collective agreement, much less a basis for governing a more balanced society. Or, it may choose to redefine the meaning of liberty, freedom and democracy, as humans on Earth have done for millennia.