Yes, it is possible to transform a despotic society into a democratic society without going through a period of chaos if there are leaders and statesmen at a high level of wisdom and sophistication such as Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela ....

A) A democratic society can be rather authoritarian.

B) There are chaotic phases in “democracies”.

C) Any external transformation is based on manipulation.

So, the question above turns into the (rhetorical) question: Is squaring of the circle possible?

Chaos is necessary to establish an orderly situation ( Second law of Thermodynamics ) ie democratisation .

An orderly system can be antidemocratic (cf. A. Huxley & G. Orwell).

To Jean Thill ,

Chaos is always present everywhere and in everything .Many chaosologists claim that chaos is an organisational form of Nature with which I agree. This means that chaos is present in every social system without exception. I also agree that an orderly system can be antidemocratic.Just remember the Nazi camps that were the highest order systems in human history, although they were anti-life organisations.Given that society is made of people, my question was about transforming each individual from an authoritarian personality into a more democratic one. In that sense, I agree that any external transformation is based on manipulation. Lastly, I disagree that this issue is rhetorical. On the contrary.

Dear all,

A) Chaos as a force is obviously present in any imperfect human system. But human society can evolve: above all thru the application of unconditional Love (cf. Jesus Christ). So, chaos is not a major problem in human societies practising Love.

B) Chaos as a force is obviously present in physical nature: see origin of the universe and various physical processes.

By the way, the discrete amplitude transform (DAT), as shown in Structure wave theory, precisely exposes how chaos functions as a creative process setting up the conceptual and manifested Mental.

It follows that "chaos is not chaos": according to the field of application, A) or B), chaos has a different connotation! In the field of human interactions, chaos is not necessary since that force can be overcome via application of the mightiest force of all: unconditional Love.

Kind regards.

ToJean Thill

A normal mother's love for a baby is something that looks like an unconditional love.In what other social and personal relationships is there unconditional love? I don't know. But I agree that love opposes chaos because it is an integrative process. When we could achieve maximum integration-maximum love we learned what God is. I view the chaos in this question as a source of new forms.

Before any civilization, there comes a vulgar period, as before human creation, there came wild dinosaurs. Arab world was wild before prophet Mohamed, but it became urban and thriving by prophet Mohamed guidance. Wildness is the prologue to domestication, as despotism is the prerequisite for democracy. Without first experiencing totalitarianism, there would be no thirst for democracy. However, any totalitarianism, roots deep into society, and to uproot and dislodge it, there should be usually a large and heavy force as revolution, or some type of chaos.

ToSaeb AmirAhmadi Chomachar ,

" Without first experiencing totalitarianism, there would be no thirst for democracy". Very interesting thinking.

The interactions of three spheres of life - civil society, market, the political system and other institutions - produces the most significant changes. In many cases, the change produced by what happens in the civil society is not enough to produce a change, it creates chaos that market pressures or political systems can easily resolve. There must be some convergence between the three or two spheres of life to bring to lasting change

Weakness of many riots of North Africa often depends on the fact that they fail to involve political institutions and market forces: in particular, institutional policies remain compact with respect to the needs for change expressed by the citizens

Dear Mr. Šarović! In my opinion chaos isa starting point for creating new order within a system or a society:

1) Sarah Repucci (2020). " Freedom in the World 2020- A Leaderless Struggle for Democracy: Democracy and pluralism are under assault" Available at: https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2020/leaderless-struggle-democracy

2) Brian McNair (2017). "From Control to Chaos, and Back Again: Journalism and the politics of populist authoritarianism" Journalism Studies 19(4):1-13 Available at:

Article From Control to Chaos, and Back Again: Journalism and the po...

Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely

Perhaps Giddens' words can be useful to us: We should speak more of reordered condition of individual and collective life, producing forms of social disintegration to be sure, but also offering new bases for generating solidarities and to combine personal autonomy with collective responsibility (Giddens (1994) Beyond Left and Right: The Future of Radical Politics, Cambridge: Polity Press 12-13).

Respected colleagues,

Thank you for your answers.

I don't think it's possible to avoid the chaos phase. Normally, a change process develops in three phases:

1.disembedding, removal from traditional context of dominance and support (the ‘liberating dimension’);

2. the loss of traditional security the ( ‘disenchantment dimension’; chaos phase);

3. re-embedding, a new type of social commitment (the ‘reintegration dimension’).

Transformation of a society needs an authentic transformational leader that has a moral compass to change a society or even followers. Ethical leadership style supports transformation of followers.

it is necessary to understand if he is a leader expressed by the strongest political institutions and parties or a leader of large but minority social groups that are not supported by any private or public institution. In these second cases, the chances of a transformation are very low