It’s true that it is not generally accepted for writing a paper or essay, but that does not mean that the information is completely unreliable. While I’m sure that Wikipedia is not perfect with regards to truth, it is more accessible, democratized and readable than many primary sources or peer reviewed articles. Those properties have a lot of value by themselves. Would you not agree?
Pardom me if I am wrong but wouldn’t you still get borders in the form of economic areas that have specific needs. Which would then result in area specific culture and governance, eventually just resulting in borders again at an eventual conflict with the neigbouring zone? I know that I am making some jumps here, but that is sort of what human history feels like.
P.S.
All for getting rid of the oligarchy btw
Do you think that that dissolving borders is really possible? On a utopian level I want to believe, but sometimes I feel like mutual dependence might be the best we got.
Right and we also use lemmy, but we still weigh and judge what we read here or at least we should. And we should do the same for Wikipedia, even though I would argue that Wikipedia has higher epistemic standards than Lemmy. The point being, the openness of these platforms is a quality on its own. Wikipedia isn’t perfect, but it is far from terrible.