I hypothesize that a first step to understanding how a government is working with its society is to map it out as a network relative to society. The object is to know how a government is directly and indirectly affecting a society in its present condition. From there, you can do research on how the government is affecting the parts of society it is reaching, which parts of society it is not reaching, and how it is not reaching those parts. From there, you can run computer experiments to see whether there is anything a government can do to change its structure, content, and/or behavior relative to a society and environment, thus enabling the search for optimal positions and policies that the government can take. If you can evaluate and track indicators within a society, you can effectively work to discover the society's "vital" measures, know how those are impacted by government, the environment, or the society's agents themselves.
It should be noted that economic indicators are lumped into the social indicators automatically and are considered a measure of the society's vitality, potential, sustainability, and survivability. Economies are networks as well and can be integrated into the larger social network graph as a "layer" that can be added to the overall graph. This can hypothetically be an integrated "overview" layer of the social world, kind of like how we can map out the networks of police, fire protection, healthcare, sewage, electricity, Internet, education, water, food, finance, taxation, goods, and service coverage that exists within and composes a society and it's economy independent of each other, with other parts, or all together, to get a comprehensive view of the social organism and the governmental organ relative and within the social organism.
In the end, it's all networks, overlapping, connecting, binding, flexing, and adapting to changing environmental, geological, geographical, political, social, and economic factors. The first step is to map it all out. The next step is to learn how parts affect other parts. The final step is to understand how to make those key decisions and choices within these networks such that you do the least amount of actual harm while doing the most amount of actual good. Reality is the judge; no human has that ability. The policies and actions will either work, not work, or work differently than was anticipated. Once we figure out how to map these networks and interconnected "small world" networks, we can begin to make more informed choices from government with regards to the policies we pursue, the laws and programs we draft to accomplish these policy aims, and how we enact and execute the laws and programs to maximize utility for the SOCIETY, which in turn, maximizes utility for the government and its members.
You want to govern forever?
I know that that is generally feasible, provided you've got a good heart, a good brain, a Hell of a sense of self interest, a genuine empathetic sense towards others' feelings and needs, the ability to admit mistakes and make real changes within yourself and within organizations' policies and procedures, and to communicate effectively with the lay public, such that you listen for what they need, and they actually comprehend what you're doing, why you're doing it to get those needs satisfied.
This is a BASIC model of how to develop and operate a government based on my comprehension of things as of 10/28/2014 CE. It is what will, I think, most likely stand the test of time in principle, if not entirely in practice throughout the changing conditions of humanity, its environment, and the universe as a whole. It will need to first, be accepted by the individual societies of the world before it can worked into the individual societies and cultures according to their own networked organizations and own processes of operating the network. This is not a one-size fits all solution by any stretch of the imagination. It is just a hypothesis for how to begin producing a government that operates in line with natural laws rather than on only the beliefs, sentiments, biases, opinions, and ignorance of individual human beings. Its aim is to honestly help the public in a self-interested fashion, from the perspective of the policy-maker and for the public that is served by the given government.
Map first. Study second. Experiment third. Execute fourth. Hold off all changes and experiments in practice until the first three stages are completed first.
May this benefit all living beings, on Earth, and beyond, from now, until the end of time, and beyond.
This is a way of modeling and making sense of our world, even if it's not a perfectly accurate way of constructing our social and environmental worlds. Now, to put these techniques into practice and study, to see if we can govern and manage our world more effectively with this metaphor.
I honestly don't think Americans appreciate the relative seriousness of our present situation. We have dysfunctional leadership in our government from all sides, which renders our ability as a nation to function in jeopardy. Our public doesn't know what to do or how to act as the leadership cadre that it is within the society, therefore rendering all efforts to change and hold our government leadership accountable ineffectual. We're suffering from several small cuts with an increasing probability of an x event occurring, along the lines of the 2007-8 Recession or rebellion and destabilization of significant portions of our society. Nobody seems willing to accept these facts for the sake of ego and/or petty false senses of security, therefore, nothing is going to be done about them until it is too late.
America's "greatness" is not innate. It has to be produced through the efforts of the public and government leadership working together for the common goals of survival, health, well-being, and quality of life. The two cannot work against each other all the time without creating significant damage to all sides. The combative, confrontational, and anti-social, hyper-competitive American system is going to fail, and I doubt we will actually rebuild with any real lessons learned. In my view, the main culprit for this is the general public, because they are the ones who can always hold a leadership in check through voting and mass organization. However, when it comes time to follow through on such actions, the American public bumbles, stumbles, and falls right back to where they started. The leaderships in government don't make it any easier for our whole society to do better. However, if the public were motivated enough, they could rise above and overcome the members of our government.
It's our fault, America.
And you are not likely to hold yourself or the government to account. The public does not check the government. The government takes advantage and goes right into the arms of those who do have money and the ability to regularly participate. We've dropped the ball, America. What are we going to do about it?
Bill Gates' critique of Thomas Piketty is revealing for what it overlooks
Eli Levine's insight:
From what I understand, you attempt to do some good in this world with your wealth. However, from what I understand, your Foundation generally subjects its recipients to a Hellish bureaucratic process that may take away from their ability to do any real good. On top of that, your monopsony may very well have slowed the progress of software development because of your anti-social business practices.
Let me cut to the chase here, for the people who actually will read this: there is no such thing as an honorable person who has gained so much through business through denying so much to so many. If you seek to live on the charity of the rich, you are going to starve. Case in point, the top earners are actually giving less to charity than all those below them (see the Chronicle of Philanthropy study on the matter). There is no excuse for amassing so much wealth and relative power, and then dangling it over the heads of those who need it the most.
We need a social system, as opposed to the anti-social one that people like Mr. Gates uses to make their wealth. We need to make growth work for everyone, so that work pays off and people are not exploited for their labor and denied opportunities to develop their talents. Most of the mundane tasks are likely going to be done by machines anyway. What are we then to do with ourselves when labor is valued at the cost and maintenance of machines, and there are no jobs left? Will we, as a society, actually consign ourselves to the pseudo-benevolence and will of these "demi-god" wannabes? I will fight and die to defend myself and my children from such a future. My price is too high for even Mr. Gates to afford (and I do have a price, because I understand the costs of doing "business" with "people" like Mr. Gates.
Which side of the fence are you going to be on? Are you going to side with them? Or are you going to side with the rest of us actual human beings?
The choice is up to you all, America. I wish you nothing but the actual best, although I suspect you're going to lead yourselves into the actual worst before you get better.
I am prepared to fight and die for the sake of my population and my own life. What are you going to do, dear reader, when that choice comes before you?
That is all I have to say for now. Please, do what you will. I'm indifferent.
My younger brother informed me about this operating system. While I have never used it, it nevertheless struck me how similar it was in principle to how societies and, perhaps, even whole ecosystems and universes organize themselves. Even if this is not a 100% accurate model for societies and social organizations, it nevertheless seems to be an interesting method of modeling and explaining how they are, grow, develop, evolve, and function, both through the bottom-up workings of its code and its top-down programmatic functions. It is a potential way of describing and working with the complexity of social systems as interdependent, interconnected, and somewhat modular within the context of an ecological and cosmological system. This is not some hippy-dippy notion of the universe, but one that could potentially be used as a tool for scientific and evidenced-based management of ourselves, individually and collectively, within the context of our environment and our universe.
Popular insurgent warfare is probably the strongest form of warfare, because it does not obey the strategies, logistical constraints, or sociological "rules" of modern warfare or the tactics of the already strong. Those who can hit and fade into the background of a society are the most powerful fighters, because those who have the military might cannot strike at them without ensuring that they themselves get hit as a result of striking at the general population from which the rebel fighters come from. The police and military become outsiders in the community. Nobody wants to side or work with them and everyone is willing to give shelter and aid to the rebel fighters. How is this? Because the public aligns with the rebel fighters rather than the police or military forces. The Federal troops are outsiders and the police are alienated from the communities they're supposed to enforce law in. This is the energy that fuels insurgent warfare; not money, or resources. If you want to defeat the rebels definitively, you must make sure that they (the rebels) are the ones who are self-alienating forces. Make sure that you maintain good relations with the general public and, quite frankly, out-govern the rebels.
Government, in any of its forms, must compete with the various factions of society who wish to dismantle it and establish their own order in society. It is not a monetary competition, but a non-monetary one, where the measure of success is significantly more complex and complicated than the measure of success for businesses and personal profiteers. These are life and death stakes, literally, in some cases. Please, do not underestimate the influence and power of the society that you are governing WITHIN (not over) when you are making your policy choices and decisions.
Please. I don't want to be compelled to fight against the government and its members for the sake of preserving this society. I WILL join the battalions who will lock horns with the current government for the sake of preserving this human society in which I live. Life is not worth living under the oppressive hand of pure financial profiteering logic. I will die fighting the forces of current capitalism than live under their beliefs, logics, and philosophies as to how the world ought to be and should function. As far as I'm concerned, it's death either way for me. I might as well attempt to make my death be useful for the rest of the public than be worth nothing as a quiet and meek follower of the incorrect assumptions about how economies work and what economies are.
That is all I've got to say at this moment.
Please do not mistake me for someone who makes idle threats.
I am a lawyer in the sense that I study and advocate for natural law (rather than our written laws, which have no value or authority in the universe other than how they impact our social world and how well we enforce it). Technically, this makes me a scientist and not a lawyer. But when it comes to making sense of these things, it may be helpful to tint the information in this light to make it more comprehensible to the public and to the current set of governing individuals in our world today. We are all, indeed, subject to law. However, it is not the written laws of our Constitution or the written laws passed through acts of our legislatures that really matter. It is the laws of the universe that really matter; the essence of cause and effect, that really governs our world in perpetuity and in spite of anything that we may do to make it "be" otherwise.
The sad part about the present state of humanity is that we're governed by people who do not know or care to know the natural law and, instead, suffer under the ignorance and delusion that the written laws that they produce matter relative to our natural laws. It is better to adapt the written laws to the natural laws of cause and effect, especially if we want to survive, let alone, be able to thrive in perpetuity and in spite of the natural calamities and disasters that are still likely to happen in our universe as time goes by. We are governed by lawyers who only study and advocate for written laws. It is time that we become governed by lawyers who study and advocate for natural laws.
Biological systems represent a unique class of physical systems in how they process and manage information. This suggests that changes in the flow and distribution of information played a prominent role in the origin of life. Here I review and expand on an emerging conceptual framework suggesting that the origin of life may be identified as a transition in causal structure and information flow, and detail some of the implications for understanding the early stages chemical evolution.
Top-Down Causation and the Rise of Information in the Emergence of Life Sara Imari Walker
If this is the case, then it confirms a lot of what I've been hypothesizing about government and its role in shaping the legal landscape of our social world (which then influences our ecological, social, environmental, and political world). Government is always beholden to the natural laws of physics, biology, psychology/neurology, sociology, and economics. However, government can play a significant role in determining the effects that we experience in our world, based on their obedience to natural laws and limits.
We can make a better, healthier, more sustainable, and more resilient world for ourselves within the context of our environment, social, ecological, and cosmological. The question is, do we have the will, intelligence, wisdom, sense, and accuracy of perception to do anything with it?
We'll see, I guess.
Here's hoping for a permanent leap forward for humanity. One that will not end until the universe itself comes to an end (it always does).
If we want Big Data to create societal progress, more transparency and participatory opportunities are needed to avoid discrimination and ensure that they are used in a scientifically sound, trustable, and socially beneficial way.
Have you ever "enjoyed" an extra screening at the airport because you happened to sit next to someone from a foreign country? Have you been surprised by a phone call offering a special service or product, because you visited a certain webpage? Or do you feel your browser reads your mind? Then, welcome to the world of Big Data, which mines the tons of digital traces of our daily activities such as web searches, credit card transactions, GPS mobility data, phone calls, text messages, facebook profiles, cloud storage, and more. But are you sure you are getting the best possible product, service, insurance or credit contract? I am not.
BIG DATA SOCIETY: Age of Reputation or Age of Discrimination?
Personally, I think it's more likely to increase peoples' abilities to make prejudicial choices about other people in addition to the actual technical advantages that this will bring about. Thus, the universe doesn't so much as change for the better, but rather muddle on under the same basic principles. We are only humans, after all. Our descendants are not going to fall far from the tree and, unless something dramatic happens to our population and to the way that our people think and feel about themselves and our world (an x-event), there will likely only be questionable or low probability change as we settle into a kind of equilibrium, for better and for worse, that we may choose to die in, rather than evolve and make a change.
Thus, we're more than likely going to take a significant hit as a species, in spite of our abilities to avoid the problems in the first place.
Education: Helping our children develop better so that they can be relatively happy individuals early on, while helping them identify career goals, inclinations, and abilities separate from what their parents may want or think later on.
I think it's time that we do a much better job with our children than just "test" them and their teachers. Whatever happened to raising them to be adults who can manage, adjust to, and accept the world around them, and then think creatively about how to work with it in ways that work? Whatever happened to instilling in them the value of learning as opposed to rote memorization? How is it that we get politics and personal preferences ahead of what matters most: our childrens' well being, mental and physical health, and quality of life?
After Scotland, all eyes are turning to Catalonia, where voters will hold a non-binding vote on independence from Spain on Nov. 9. But maybe Americans need to focus closer to home. We already knew—courtesy of Slate’s David Weigel—that breakaway movements in the United States were feeling inspired by the Scotland...
Eli Levine's insight:
Looks like we could be coming to the end of another union.
I'd be ok with it, honestly.
Conservatives take one territory, progressives take the other.
If progressives play our cards right, we could end up on top of this whole situation. It'll take sense, evidence-based (not ideological) governing, a Hell of a good strategic edge, and the willingness to admit to mistakes in order to correct for them.
We're about empathy, honesty, openness, tolerance, acceptance, and facts.
Let us compete with greed, deception, lies, xenophobia, racism, classism, sexism, and all other non-American and anti-social traits.
If we lose, then it proves that this universe is not a good one to be in anyway, because there's then a serious defect in how rewards and punishments are dealt out. Nature is indifferent to morals, and justice is blind. Let's find out if karma exists in states beyond simple "action". Is the universe indeed a moral and ethical place? If not, than it's really not worth saving, and we'd all likely be better off abandoning this existence to its inevitable doom and death.
That, or we can stay together as one country, let everyone ditch the conservative brain-state, and we can continue on from there with evidence, facts, and an ethically grounded and social society.
I'm willing to cede the whole baby to the conservatives. Take the universe, take the country, take the world. I don't think it'll do them any good in the long term or short term. That decision, though, is out of my hands.
"Seldom has it been more important for Americans to form a realistic assessment of the world scene. But our current governing, college-educated class suffers one glaring blind spot.
Modern American culture produces highly individualistic career and identity paths for upper- and middle-class males and females. Power couples abound, often sporting different last names. But deeply held religious identities and military loyalties are less common. Few educated Americans have any direct experience with large groups of men gathered in intense prayer or battle. Like other citizens of the globalized corporate/consumer culture, educated Americans are often widely traveled but not deeply rooted in obligation to a particular physical place, a faith or a kinship."
Societies are, indeed, governed by people and not by laws. People can make or unmake written laws, just as easily as societies can make or unmake people who make laws.
However, we are, in fact, governed by Natural Law, the laws of nature, society, the environment, the universe around us. We are it and it is us. We discover it, we do not actually make it.
The faith in written law of our society, the Constitution, has been violated by those who have no respect for written or natural law. To this end, we fall back on Natural Law, as discovered by the scientific method and revealed to us over time through experimentation, observation, and accident, to correct these mistake people who currently sit in places of high power, consequence, and authority, and yet do not seem to understand how to operate and work for their own actual benefit within the confines of these discovered and unwritten laws.
The Law is indeed supreme. No one made them though. They're just the rules that have existed, as far as we can tell, since beyond the beginning of time and forward to the end of time and beyond. To change and alter them here is to subject yourself to the consequences of changing those Laws which are apart of nature and the universe that is us. They simply are, and we are always going to be bound by the consequences of them, no matter how hard we may try to make it be otherwise. Those who do not get it and work with the world in this basic fashion are likely those who are least capable of governing and effectively managing a world. They do not see the walls which naturally exist. They will not understand how to use those Laws for your own sake and benefit within the context of those laws. They will rebel against those discovered Laws, because their brains are not accurately reading or working with reality that is them.
They are sick people.
And they need to be removed from office permanently, as a personality/brain type, so that they may never again make our society a perverse corner of the universe. They are like animals who do not get the basic concept of not pissing or pooping in a distinct corner, for the sake of their health and well-being relative to all other lifeforms in this universe. They seem to feel as though they can (and should be allowed to) go wherever they please, regardless of the consequences that are exacted upon themselves and on others whom they depend on. There is, I think, no freedom in this universe. There is only Law, and those who won't get or accept it. Even when you "break" free, you are still bound by the discovered Natural Laws. You can either live with, accept, and maximize your utility based on those Laws. Or, you can fight them, resist them, and make life for yourself and your friends, family, and companions worse. It all depends on how your brains work, as to whether you go one way or another. Those who follow Laws, tend to be more able to pass on their genes and memes in the long term, than those who don't. Even if the breakers of Law kill off all Law abiders, they will be more likely to kill themselves off as a result of their negligence, stupidity, and ignorance of themselves and the world that is them.
Obey the Law.
Or suffer the consequences that you yourself bring on.
The free market, when it is truly allowed to be 100% free of regulation or tracking (not controlling) leads to its own demise, either through the destruction of the environment or through a revolution within the society. If you start out as having more of an opportunity or some kind of advantage over another, you tend to increase your wealth faster than others. That, in and of itself, is not a problem when taken in moderate doses. However, as time goes on, the wealth for those individuals tends to grow exponentially over time in a non-linear fashion, leading to the extra growth of the pie being consumed by a few individuals while everyone else has less and less and less of a stake within the system. Capitalism becomes an exclusive system, rather than an inclusive one. The governments of the world are replaced by businesses groups and special interests who have wealth at their disposal, which decreasingly reflects the needs and characteristics of the general population. The interests dig in, rather than shift and adapt to the changing and increasingly negative dynamic between themselves and the general public. Conservatism and rigidity in thinking and behaving sets in, especially as the governing members age, and the system becomes increasingly vulnerable to attack and/or rot. External powers may also play a role in the destruction of the current government members, either in the form of other societies or environmental factors.
This is the ghost of Karl Marx haunting the Capitalists long after the fall of the major "Communist" powers. The pigs will consume themselves and their precious system. The more they brutalize and take, the more likely they'll be removed, and the more likely the rest of society will treat them poorly when they are removed.
There is a cost to deception. There is a cost to taking and receiving. The market system works great, when it is moderated in order to protect the environment and the employed classes. Labor is not the same as a regular commodity; there is no comparative advantage to not having domestic manufacturing and actually producing innovative goods and services that people will want to buy. We're going to die for the sake of an idealized system, perpetuated by foolish academics and business leaders who see only cash and not value as an organism. The time is coming for us to pick a side between those who already have and are going to consume everything, and those who have nothing and have the greatest potential to rebuild and survive, even if the business leaders and politicians are shot (and they will be more likely shot if they continue to ignore and brutalize the public).
It can happen here. America is not an exception to the natural laws of societies and human behavior, nor are we not subject to the conditions and social/ecological factors that exist outside of our society. The time is coming for absolution. This is the end of Capitalism in its present form and the birth of a new system of market economic logic, study, and management. Otherwise, the species is going to suffer significant losses and the boss pigs will be dead.
Conservatives tend to select themselves out of positions of power and, when left to their own devices without progressives' periodic or constant intervention, will likely naturally self-select out of existence as a sub-group of humans. We all have the same hardware that creates conservatism; it seems to be in the reptilian brain, which is common to us all. The difference between conservatives and other humans is that they seem to have a much more powerful reptilian brain than the rest of us, thus denying them the ability to work with complex issues with nuance, ambiguity, and subtlety as well as other human beings. They seem entirely consumed with obsessing over their small self, or their definition of self, rather than the whole or the other or the larger self that extends to all things, living, dead, or inanimate in this universe. There is no real love in their behavior or actions; no real compassion or care. Just repetition and a sad attachment to imaginary concepts and incorrect hypotheses about how things are and work together. There is no more point in listening to them, and the best that society can do to them is to remove them from all places of influence, power, authority, and consequence for the mental health clinics that they so unceremoniously underfunded and destroyed. It's time that we institute a more social system than their anti-social, money-grubbing, Capitalisitc barbarism. It's time to govern with reason, compromise, discussion, and attachment to truth and common reality. No more should we be ruled through fear, oppression, force, deception, lies, and ignorance, willful or otherwise.
These are, however, all normative statements. There is nothing in the world here or anywhere that suggests that things will necessarily be different in the world just because we've changed the contents of several influential nodes in our network, least of all, the combined nodes of the general public. We will still be plagued by these apparently diseased brain types within our society and within other societies. We will still have to deal with all the consequences of their poor choices and priorities, as well as all new disasters, dangers, threats, problems, and sticky situations that will absolutely arise as time goes on. At the same time, these minute changes in either the mental or physical content of these critical nodes can make important differences in our world, particularly if they join together to work towards a common cause of health, survival, and the ability to thrive on this planet and others. It is time that we work to extricate the more monkey-like among us from their places of power, consequence, authority, power, and, at the heart of it, responsibility.
That, or we can keep clinging to them out of fear, and finding that the only thing we have to fear, really, is them, time and time again.
The authorities who currently sit in power have the whole idea of power backwards.
It is love, honesty, care, and effective actions that people respond to, not force, or deception, or graft. The governing bodies of our world should have the same ethic, logic, and methodology as medical personnel who actually care about the well being of the public as if it were their own self. It is only through this exchange that people willingly fall into line behind people. It is only through care, benevolence, love, effective, and benevolent action that people reliably remain willing and able to follow you. This is not a guarantee. Governing, or to be a member of the governing bodies, is not a right. It is a privilege that can be revoked, either through force of arms by the public, or by honest democratic sentiment and action.
I'm personally tired of having to reiterate this for the upper crusts of our world who are STILL slow on the uptake. I'm beginning to question their mental capacities and their cognitive/emotional abilities, in light of their actions and choices. If these continue, I would conclude that the only sensible course of action is for the society to remove the people on top by force of arms and, hopefully, commit them to mental health clinics for treatment and diagnosis. This is the most kind thing that I can offer those folks on "top" of our social world. Many would have them be killed (and, quite frankly, I don't blame people for feeling that way, even though I disagree with the method).
Shots have already been fired in Canada, perhaps for these reasons. This is only going to get worse for everyone involved, including the general public and the upper class elites. The only question is whether people on top will correctly get the message and interpret it correctly.
This is the ending stages of one age, and the certain beginning of a new one. How new it's going to be depends on what we do in the present. That's all we have, and all we're going to have.
To reflect the minimum phenomena required, other biological definitions of life have been proposed, many of these are based upon chemical systems. Biophysicists have commented that living things function on negative entropy. In other words, living processes can be viewed as a delay of the spontaneous diffusion or dispersion of the internal energy of biological molecules towards more potential microstates.
Indeed, what is a human society but a larger social organism, based on this definition?
I'm honestly not sure about the Gaia Hypothesis, because the systems can be way too divergent. However, the principle of interconnectedness may prove to be a useful tool in understanding how things work and what effects what in this universe, society, and environment. If we could work to map out our social, ecological, and cosmological universe, we may end up with one of the most useful tools we could have in order to test, diagnose, and solve problems within our society from the micro through to the macro levels, such that everyone benefits and no one gets hurt in the process. The bottom is influenced and effected by the top, the top is kept in line by the bottom. The two need to work together in order to produce a healthy and functional society for the sake of each actors' own sake and for the sake of all other beings, human or otherwise, living in the world with us.
This is how the world is. No point in trying to make it "be" anything other than what it is.
A government without the ability or will to create and enforce written law essentially leads to and is anarchy by default. That is why Libertarians are, in essence, anarchists, because they do not want a government that has the ability to create and enforce law within the territory and population of its jurisdiction.
I agree that written law should coincide with natural law. I don't agree that the US Constitution was meant to create a feeble, ineffectual, and essentially inconsequential government and I also don't agree that the US Constitution is a sacred text that cannot and should not be updated with the changing needs and conditions of society. I believe in the spirit of the Constitution; the principles that underlie it, which describes a society of people being essentially equal under law, and entitled to the same rights and opportunities as everyone else in the society. The net result of Libertarian or conservative systems of government is the production of societies where people have unequal opportunities and where people have no individual security other than what they can provide with the resources at their disposal (which gets less and less as those who have more take more and more). In this sense, people are essentially like dogs, who do not have the ability to control their own feeding habits when presented with the opportunity for unlimited access to material and social resources. The half a million becomes a million, the million becomes five, the five multiples to twenty, and so on and so forth, regardless of if that wealth is something that they need or if it is produced with methods that detract from their social, personal, and environmental condition.
Therefore, we should not listen to conservative or Libertarian voices in our government. Their root ideas, beliefs, and sentiments are self-destructive and toxic for the rest of our society, which then makes it toxic for themselves as well. They are the Ignoratti; a group of people who need to come in for psychiatric treatment. While they may be more functional than those who are presently diagnosable with mental illnesses, they are far more destructive to themselves and their societies through their actions, beliefs, and perspectives. We may all be human and, in that sense, of essentially equal value. However, opinion does not work like that, along with the ability to work with the world as a whole around you. They need to come in from the cold, if they want to be considered legitimate participants in our government, or, we must exclude them from positions of authority, responsibility, and societal management. We will die because of these people, if we allow them to stay in place. I am not asking for their deaths. I am asking for us to help them and to bear the condition and consequences of their brains in mind when listening to them within the larger political discourse. That's all that I'm asking for. I doubt anyone will listen and help me put that into practice in real life.
I am, indeed, closed to some ideas and some concepts if they have been definitively proven to be incorrect in common reality. I will not seriously entertain the notion that 2+2=5 or that the area of a triangle is anything other than bh/2. The same is true for many things in the realm of making policy, in terms of causes and effects, because societies and economies have their own properties and natural laws that govern them. The only difference is that we have not systemically studied these laws and principles with the scientific method or the testing tools that we have at our disposal, even though many of the great political thinkers and philosophers (Confucius, Aristotle, Machiavelli, Buddha, etc) have already touched upon these natural laws through intuition and experience. We can double check, confirm, and bear witness to the natural law being carried out, even if we do not have any say at present as to what those laws actually are. Even if we figure out how to defy gravity, or conscientiously effect reality itself, we will still be subject to the consequences of doing so, regardless about what we feel and how we think about it. Being correct is not an equal opportunity thing, and just because you may be able to do something doesn't mean it's in your interests as an individual relative to society, the environment, and the universe to do so.
Therefore, we are at a crossroads in the universe, in my estimation of current events and present conditions. We will either learn to accept our place in the grand scheme of things and acknowledge the power, influence, and necessity of natural law and conditions, or, we will succumb to our arrogance, stupidity, and willful ignorance that the universe can be something other than what it is. We do not make reality, reality makes us. You can either accept these facts and all others, and have a chance at survival. Or, you can persist in your willful ignorance, arrogance, and stupidity of how things are, and increase your chances of death, destruction, and self-mutilation.
A policy engineer is a more accurate description of what I'd like to do than a social engineer. I'm not really interested in making societies. Rather, I'm interested in making policies and programs for societies, much like medical engineers make treatments and regimens for human bodies. The only difference is the scale and scope.
When is the U.S. banking system going to crash? We can sum it up in three words. Watch the derivatives. It used to be only four, but now there are five "too big to fail" banks in the United States that each have more than 40 trillion dollars in exposure to derivatives.
The "too big to fail" banks run up enormous profits from their derivatives trading. According to the New York Times, U.S. banks "have nearly $280 trillion of derivatives on their books" even though the financial crisis of 2008 demonstrated how dangerous they could be...
American banks have nearly $280 trillion of derivatives on their books, and they earn some of their biggest profits from trading in them. But the 2008 crisis revealed how flaws in the market had allowed for dangerous buildups of risk at large Wall Street firms and worsened the run on the banking system.
The International System is a self-organized system and shows emergent behavior. During the timeframe (1495 - 1945), a finite-time singularity and four accompanying accelerating log-periodic cycles shaped the dynamics of the International System. The accelerated growth of the connectivity of the regulatory network of the International System, in combination with its anarchistic structure, produce and shape the war dynamics of the system. Accelerated growth of the connectivity of the International system is fed by population growth and the need for social systems to fulfill basic requirements. The finite-time singularity and accompanying log-periodic oscillations were instrumental in the periodic reorganization of the regulatory network of the International System, and contributed to a long-term process of social expansion and integration in Europa. The singularity dynamic produced a series of organizational innovations. At the critical time of the singularity (1939) the connectivity of the system reached a critical threshold, resulting in a critical transition. This critical transition caused a fundamental reorganization of the International System: Europe transformed from an anarchistic system to cooperative security community. This critical transition also marks the actual globalization of the International System. During the life span of cycles, the war dynamics show chaotic characteristics. Various early-warning signals can be identified, and can probably be used in the current International System. These findings have implications for the social sciences and historical research.
Note: It is impossible to install a leadership cadre in a manner that is not appropriate, acceptable, and according to the cultural logic of the society in question. Furthermore, only people who are actually well grounded in reality, desiring to discover and know the truths of this universe, good, bad, and indifferent, and who have a genuine understanding as to how their well being ties in with other peoples' well being are going to be capable of being leaders within a society for any significant period of time. Only those who meet both these personal and methodological qualifications will be practical leaders and will actually be able to carry out these actions effectively and legitimacy. This is, again, dependent upon the cultural context, the economic, social, technological, and environmental conditions of the universe at any given time or place. With all of these personal and conditional parameters in mind, we can begin to think about how to systematically change core leadership and core culture within a leadership cadre (not necessarily in the entirety of the society beyond the leadership cadre).
It starts by changing the top of the organization or the society. This is not to say that one person can change the whole, rather, a dedicated team of qualified people who replace all of the top leadership cadre members who are not qualified to be leaders in a given society. From there, the new cadre can alienate and isolate the old leadership cadre from society or organization, starting from the top, and working their way down to effect the lower realms of the organization. Rules, norms, values, and culture gets changed according to the will of the new leadership cadre within the parameters of legitimacy and condition of the old system below. Failure to regard the environment, social or otherwise, is a death sentence for the would be new leadership cadre. From there, the old leadership cadre can be driven out and tracked for actions and behaviors for several years or decades, depending upon their personal temperament and connectivity to other people who were pushed out of office. Those networks need to be known, followed, and tracked. Any breath of sedition or malevolence against the publics' demanded new order can be evaluated and brought to light depending upon the severity. The offenders can then be brought out into the public's eye, tried legitimately and fairly in a court of law, and sentenced appropriately according to the processes, sentiments, and culture that is present. From there, they can be put in jail or confined to a mental institution separated from their network associates and connections.
This would be to correct for the grave error that Franklin Roosevelt made when he did not follow up, track, and prosecute the heads of big business and banking for their plot to overthrow the elected government of the United States, also known as the Business Plot of 1933 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot). The most recent example of this being put into practice successfully was, ironically, under Nazi Germany during the Night of the Long Knives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_the_Long_Knives). The differences here, are that there are no knives being used, no malevolence towards the opposition, no murders, public or private, and no cynical manipulation of the public's will. I hypothesize that this is the best basic methodology for both installing and cementing a new leadership cadre within a given society. You start by changing the attitudes, beliefs, perspectives and, sometimes, personnel on top. You then have them use their authority to remove people who aren't willing or able to play ball with the new system down below in the organizational networks' hierarchies.
Imagine a computer where you change programs from one (let's call it an Anti-Social System) to another (let's call it a Social System). The user clicks on the new program, which then starts to run a series of processes within the computer to call into being the new program. The only difference is the preference or content of the leadership cadre in question who's clicking the program to make it be one way or another. Bottom-up change is ultimately what changes the leadership cadre because there is a partial-percolation from society to the top ranks and important decision makers of society. If it's not personnel, it's ideas and sentiments that get carried up the chain to influence the affect, logic, and perspective of the people in top offices. Thus you have the top responding to pressure from the bottom. However, it is only when you have appropriate and effective changes in the top somehow, that you get real change down below and throughout the whole of the system. Otherwise, you have the people on the top selecting incorrectly relative to the needs and conditions of the social and ecological environments, which then hastens their removal from those positions or leads to the collapse of the whole social and environmental system with the leadership cadre going with them both. Either way, the leadership pays for their stubbornness, unwillingness to accept truth and facts, and greed, while the rest of society will either stumble on or collapse entirely into species-wide extinction. Either way, the leadership cadre in question loses, while the society can either win, lose, or "break-even". Such a set of outcomes is obviously not what the leadership cadre is looking for if they are behaving in a way that is not destructive to themselves and destructive to others. Therefore, I propose that we either arrest the leadership cadre of the world powers, private and public, and commit them to a mental facility and initiate the new changes in leadership post haste, accept their voluntary resignations from office, or have them accept that their current sets of attitudes, beliefs, logics, perspectives, and whole way of feeling and thinking about the human world as being incorrect and then making appropriate changes from there to correct those misconceptions and patches of ignorance.
Change is never an easy thing and it's never good to feel as though your whole world has collapsed from under you. I get that entirely. However, we're talking literal survival here, not only of the collective, but of the individual members of the present elite as well. If you want to have a different outcome than death, destruction, mayhem, and damaging loss, you have to accept metaphysical death, destruction, mayhem, and loss. It is only through making a sacrifice of attitude, belief, priority, perspective, and action that the rich and the present politicians of our era are going to survive, let alone, be able to survive and keep their jobs and places. All I am looking for is this change in attitude, belief, perspective, logic, sentiment, and action. The rest will follow suit if they fail to give up these small things that I know are near and dear to their hearts, sentiments, and wallets.
The choices are up to them. But I doubt they'll make the right ones in time.