Wednesday, September 3, 2014

Who's Holding The Reins? Literally, No One! Electorates Are Some Data Late And A Context Short Of National Return-On-Coordination.

   (Commentary posted by Roger Erickson)

When systemic accounts decline, who, in the end, is accountable? Where does the fiat stop?




This matters because Bill Mitchell notes that "National Accounts" are continuing to decline.

And it's not just Australia.

You know, Bill, reading all your useful summaries of already published data ... one can't help recognizing how droll this all is.

The so-called "Business Cycle" - and bubbles/booms/busts/Bull-Mkts & Depressions too - are simply the result of various permutations of old/young buffoons failing to network adequately.

















When distributed components of a SYSTEM quit sending/receiving/analyzing and testing collective responses to enough of their own distributed feedback .... well, then their system breaks down.




Then the insane return-on-coordination that we call human culture rapidly declines, as an inevitable result.

That core reason WHY cultural systems get too far from unpredictable Cultural Survival Paths is the same old story throughout the history of planet Earth.




[semi-social amoeba, Dictyostelium discoideum]

The real message is that if WE don't evolve a BETTER WAY - ASAP - to manage our own affairs, then some other system WILL quickly replace us, as sure as permanently multi-cellular species replaced single-cell cultural approaches.

It's all about our NET Policy Agility, in our demanding race to explore Policy Space (aka, perceived or allowable options). Until these phrases are familiar to every citizen, we'll continue to do less than we're capable of doing.

Any combination of young-to-old buffoons can quickly run whole cultures off a cliff, or linger too long in the past, long past when context has changed - IF THE WRONG SPECTRUM OF PEOPLE ARE HANDED THE POLICY REINS!!! If policy attempts proceed without adequate feedback .. the result is random, which is bad ... by simple statistics alone. The bigger the system, the smaller the ratio of adaptive to maladaptive action patterns there are. We have to ramp up our distributed selection efforts as fast as our options accumulate, or else we end up consuming ourselves.

With the proverbial wave of a little pinky, clumsy policy can undo any amount of agile strategy, tactics, technology and distributed brilliance & effort. Democracy works exactly to the extent that NO ONE tries to just do "their" job, and ignores participation in distributed feedback.

A system really does mean a system, and only the most agile systems survive to keep evolving.

An agile system means one that oscillates back and forth between resiliency and efficiency, as frequently as needed, no matter how fast it grows. Switching between resiliency and efficiency means QUICKLY reconnecting all feedback to all feedback, on demand, before just as quickly relaxing to a just-adequate solution to a transient context, before it changes again.

We can talk and argue endlessly about all the details of all the late, expensive repairs to degraded systems (call them various ideologies) ... but the approach that will win in the end is to raise citizens who first gain, early on, an appreciation for their own, evolving cultural system, and then NEVER LOSE IT! That's the only way to have citizens who know how to leverage culture and policy space, not just their personal space.

Every other approach is a losing strategy. No organically growing system can keep up with expensive repair alone. Only cheap, prevention adaptation works. We won't recover or move on until this message results in very systemic overhaul of K-12 education. Until then, we'll keep churning out a majority who are some data late and a context short of national return-on-coordination.

A Group Intelligence is a terrible thing to waste, but we're trying our best to do it.



No comments: