Society is a complex adaptive system made up of smaller but no less complex adaptive systems which are then in turn made up of even smaller systems. This property (roughly illustrated here) is known as self-similarity. Essentially, the system is approximately similar to any part of itself.
The people you hate are so much like you, the difference hardly matters to the system as a whole.
I realize, this statement is somewhat depressing, but take heart. It also means that although the positions of those who oppose you in society may seem alien and absurd to you, their base motivations are entirely understandable, even if they express in radically different forms. Carefully studying and defining the motivations and reasons behind your social and political opponents' views can lead to insight into how to tackle the problem they present.
Let us speak of universal health care. When discussing it, liberals generally focus on social justice and the right everyone has to medical treatment. On the other hand, conservatives generally speak of cost. Watching a casual debate that covers universal health care is often times like watching sailing galleons fire multiple broadsides at point blank range while forgetting to load cannonballs in 90% of their cannons, a constant barrage of smoke and fire with almost nothing hitting its mark.
Conservatives will occasionally argue the issue that liberals focus on, claiming that individuals need to be responsible for their own actions and do not have a right to medical coverage in the free market. There are any number of scenarios where hard-working Americans can end up uninsured and needing medical treatment, but these are generally dismissed as edge cases. Extending this thought suggests that for conservatives it is more important to punish the irresponsible (and their children) than to protect the honest who have fallen through the cracks.
Why is this incorrect? A complex adaptive system is defined by its complexity, ability to adapt, self-similarity, self-organization, and emergent traits. Actions within the system that reduce these traits can be said to be harmful to the system's viability. Most simply: removing actors purposefully harms the system as a whole, no matter how much one may think the actor in question "deserves" it. A more nuanced but also more powerful observation is that by limiting the freedom of the actors within the system based upon the feedback loops initiated by other actors can lead to a reduction in adaptability and self-organization. It can be argued from a historical perspective that a permanent underclass causes stagnation or at least retardation of progress in a society. For thousands of years technological advances were discarded, ignored or not sought for the simple reason that it was far easier to solve labor problems with addition slaves rather than improve efficiency. If a large portion of low-income people are simply ignored when researching medical advances, a far lower emphasis will be placed on efficient, cost-effective, and widely distributable technologies and processes. Additionally, with no positive pressure to improve the overall health of the society, the pitfalls of lack of regular health care will continue to plague a large segment of the population. This actually creates a pressure in the market to develop late-intervention treatments and medicines only to address the symptoms of problems that could have been solved much earlier, further reducing the amount of effort and resources devoted to medical research that could extend life, address disease and overcome grievous injury. The system thus slows in its progression while addressing the symptoms of systemic problems without solving them, reducing complexity, adaptability, and self-organizational freedom. What is healthy for the system is healthy for the large majority of its actors. It is therefore not socially just to push for punishment of the uninsured rather than advancement of the responsible.
I touched on cost and money above when pointing out that resources used to treat symptoms of systemic problems would be better spent solving the problems and then moving on to new advancement, but the major complaint against universal health care is not generally how money is spent, but where it comes from. For reasons discussed above, some do not want to pay additional taxes to fund the health care costs of those less fortunate. The tax rates of European countries are held to be an oppressive and sinister axe over the head of the American people. Never-the-less, Americans spend far more per capita on health care than any other industrialized country while simultaneously being ranked low in life expectancy and infant mortality. The fiscally responsible should seriously question the demonstrated efficiency of this current system. Paying more for less is the opposite of sound financial policy.
Study of foreign models for universal healthcare demonstrate a much higher efficiency for the majority of patients. It is worried that the health care quality of the wealthy will fall under universal health care, especially those on the edge of the upper and middle class divide. However, the government does not propose a monopoly on health care, private providers and policies will continue to be available. There will be pressure on these providers to improve service and offer additional benefits as many of the wealthy will find the universal coverage suits their needs and abandon the private plans. There are currently laws in place that promote affordable and available health insurance. With the requirements impossed by these laws lifted from private insurers and placed upon the single-payer system, private firms are more able to focus on services desired by their wealthy customers. Rather than threatening the quality of care the rich can expect to receive, the situation benefits the wealthy consumer.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Feedback Loop
Politics is getting a bit acrimonious for me lately, so allow me to wander if you will.
The everyday world is a number of overlapping systems of frightening complexity. If you isolate any small part of the system, the rules that govern it are simple and straightforward, but when allowed to run, the system made up of these small parts is intricate and difficult to predict. For instance, the flight capabilities and patterns of a bird can be quantified easily enough. However, when placed in a flock, the mechanism of collection movement is still being studied and understood. The simple rules that govern an individual's reactions collaborate to form a flock of birds that appears to move as a single entity.
This is all pretty basic stuff, allow me to move on before I bore you. The question at hand is: why I have a blog called Applied Punk and have thus far filled it with political rumblings from a liberal business perspective?
When you introduce the ability to adapt into a system, you have a complex adaptive system (CAS) as you might expect by simply adding "adapt" to the list of words used so far. However, this is a profoundly more complex type of system to study. A CAS will possess a number of feedback loops, behaviors which in response to stimulus create modified or amplified reactions within the system and feed further loops. For a simple example, think of how social feedback affects you as a single actor in the system of interpersonal relationships. A sunny mood can turn sour based upon interaction with one dour acquaintance and your now less-than-cheery attitude can and does influence others. Based upon the pitch of circumstances around them, a group of individuals will settle into a collective mindset. Panic spreads, mobs turn ugly, altruism makes its rounds, and populist movements swell.
The specific study of information systems and feedback is called cybernetics, a term many would be interested to know was actually far older than metal arms and techno-music. The Greek kybernetike relates to ship steersmen and art. In short Plato stated governing, ie social control, was less about accumulated knowledge than it was responding to the mercurial conditions of populations. An art is less about what is known, but what is done with knowledge. This term was later used in the study of mechanical, biological, and information systems but became heavily tied to the growing use of computers and study of computer systems.
Computer hackers of the future sporting metallic cyberarms a la Blade Runner, Johnny Mnemonic, and many others firmly cemented the term "cyber" in many minds to robotic parts, computers, and the internet. The genre was not simply science fiction though. Heavily influenced by the punk rock subculture, much was to be said about the DIY ethic, anti-establishment, anti-capitalism, nihilism, primacy of freedom, and a slew of other often-conflicting and often-cooperating political and social views. I have unkind words for anyone who is against everything and professes nothing, but the core of punk values, and the perceived injustices of the world that punks reacted so strongly to are valid, even if never explored with sophistication.
When one is part of a CAS, it is difficult to describe and accurately predict the system, much less affect purposeful change. When system theory is applied to psychology, one can begin to see the futility in forcing any major change on a social system. Control can only be exercised with any hope of success on subsets of the system separated in some way from the main. Memes must be incubated by the dedicated and generalized in obviously advantageous forms. Societies, cultures, and disparate ethnic groups must have the freedom to be themselves while receiving pressure to be positive actors in the wider community. Some behaviors are harmful and pressure should be applied by a greater portion of the system to quash what harms the greater community, but a live-and-let-live attitude fosters the competition of ideas and methods that is a net positive for the system as a whole. The punk attitude suggests changing yourself and giving up on the establishment. Perhaps that goes too far, but the most effective change an individual can make is personal. Communities of individuals working for a more efficient and just society can add up to more than the sum of their parts.
It puts a new spin on cyberpunk.
The everyday world is a number of overlapping systems of frightening complexity. If you isolate any small part of the system, the rules that govern it are simple and straightforward, but when allowed to run, the system made up of these small parts is intricate and difficult to predict. For instance, the flight capabilities and patterns of a bird can be quantified easily enough. However, when placed in a flock, the mechanism of collection movement is still being studied and understood. The simple rules that govern an individual's reactions collaborate to form a flock of birds that appears to move as a single entity.
This is all pretty basic stuff, allow me to move on before I bore you. The question at hand is: why I have a blog called Applied Punk and have thus far filled it with political rumblings from a liberal business perspective?
When you introduce the ability to adapt into a system, you have a complex adaptive system (CAS) as you might expect by simply adding "adapt" to the list of words used so far. However, this is a profoundly more complex type of system to study. A CAS will possess a number of feedback loops, behaviors which in response to stimulus create modified or amplified reactions within the system and feed further loops. For a simple example, think of how social feedback affects you as a single actor in the system of interpersonal relationships. A sunny mood can turn sour based upon interaction with one dour acquaintance and your now less-than-cheery attitude can and does influence others. Based upon the pitch of circumstances around them, a group of individuals will settle into a collective mindset. Panic spreads, mobs turn ugly, altruism makes its rounds, and populist movements swell.
The specific study of information systems and feedback is called cybernetics, a term many would be interested to know was actually far older than metal arms and techno-music. The Greek kybernetike relates to ship steersmen and art. In short Plato stated governing, ie social control, was less about accumulated knowledge than it was responding to the mercurial conditions of populations. An art is less about what is known, but what is done with knowledge. This term was later used in the study of mechanical, biological, and information systems but became heavily tied to the growing use of computers and study of computer systems.
Computer hackers of the future sporting metallic cyberarms a la Blade Runner, Johnny Mnemonic, and many others firmly cemented the term "cyber" in many minds to robotic parts, computers, and the internet. The genre was not simply science fiction though. Heavily influenced by the punk rock subculture, much was to be said about the DIY ethic, anti-establishment, anti-capitalism, nihilism, primacy of freedom, and a slew of other often-conflicting and often-cooperating political and social views. I have unkind words for anyone who is against everything and professes nothing, but the core of punk values, and the perceived injustices of the world that punks reacted so strongly to are valid, even if never explored with sophistication.
When one is part of a CAS, it is difficult to describe and accurately predict the system, much less affect purposeful change. When system theory is applied to psychology, one can begin to see the futility in forcing any major change on a social system. Control can only be exercised with any hope of success on subsets of the system separated in some way from the main. Memes must be incubated by the dedicated and generalized in obviously advantageous forms. Societies, cultures, and disparate ethnic groups must have the freedom to be themselves while receiving pressure to be positive actors in the wider community. Some behaviors are harmful and pressure should be applied by a greater portion of the system to quash what harms the greater community, but a live-and-let-live attitude fosters the competition of ideas and methods that is a net positive for the system as a whole. The punk attitude suggests changing yourself and giving up on the establishment. Perhaps that goes too far, but the most effective change an individual can make is personal. Communities of individuals working for a more efficient and just society can add up to more than the sum of their parts.
It puts a new spin on cyberpunk.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Negative Feedback Loop
In these trying times there is a danger of losing sight of the bigger picture, the little guy, the long term consequences, and even the real goal of recovery. I believe many are losing sight of something, allow me to explain:
I am a new type of small businessman. I am wired, but more importantly, I am international. Automated translation services have helped this endeavor, but like many Americans I lack fluency in any language other than English. However, because I am America, no one bats an eye at meeting with me in English.
Do not ruin this for me.
We Americans have enjoyed a long run at the top of the business world. However, I see a worrying trend in American society. Anti-intellectualism is running deep. Our business culture is so focused on short-term profit that they ship even our innovation overseas. American teams are producing clones of the successful product from last year and all of the interesting work is being done by others. Despite being a people that pride ourselves on industrialism and innovation, we've been cashing innovation and robust industry out for a quick buck for years now. We're starting to see the bitter fruits of that kind of strategy.
For thirty years Republicans in America have been working under the assumption that giving money to the wealthy will cause them to consume products that generate American jobs and invest in projects that support American business. This has not been the case. Income for the middle class has stagnated while productivity per worker has continued to increase. This is damming evidence that trickle down economics have watered few but the highest flowers. Investment of this additional capital has turned out to have been ephemeral. Instead of investing in business, billions were wasted in a speculative gambling system where it was impossible to lose. Only, it turned out to be all too possible to lose, and lose massively while creating nothing and consuming all. Even the investments in American business did not generate jobs and prosperity. Corporate profits just two years ago where at an all-time high and these profits were used to buy back stock, a move that only enriched the wealthy and inflated the market's value.
By ever measure of wealth distribution, social mobility, and class division, America has started to lag behind the rest of the first world. And now, in terms of innovation, research, and industrial power, we are starting to slip.
Stimulus is about more than creating a few do-nothing jobs. Funding for advanced battery manufacture, broadband infrastructure, and transportation infrastructure will help spurn American business. From the public sector, wise investments in companies willing to grind out modest profits while supplying high-quality products and employing highly-skilled workers in high-potential industries will be the lifeblood of recovery. Strong, stable companies are required to provide America the rock-solid base from which to take flights of fancy and innovative leaps. When they crash, we've lost only excess profits and learned much from the endeavor. When they soar, we will be again living up to the American ideal.
I am a new type of small businessman. I am wired, but more importantly, I am international. Automated translation services have helped this endeavor, but like many Americans I lack fluency in any language other than English. However, because I am America, no one bats an eye at meeting with me in English.
Do not ruin this for me.
We Americans have enjoyed a long run at the top of the business world. However, I see a worrying trend in American society. Anti-intellectualism is running deep. Our business culture is so focused on short-term profit that they ship even our innovation overseas. American teams are producing clones of the successful product from last year and all of the interesting work is being done by others. Despite being a people that pride ourselves on industrialism and innovation, we've been cashing innovation and robust industry out for a quick buck for years now. We're starting to see the bitter fruits of that kind of strategy.
For thirty years Republicans in America have been working under the assumption that giving money to the wealthy will cause them to consume products that generate American jobs and invest in projects that support American business. This has not been the case. Income for the middle class has stagnated while productivity per worker has continued to increase. This is damming evidence that trickle down economics have watered few but the highest flowers. Investment of this additional capital has turned out to have been ephemeral. Instead of investing in business, billions were wasted in a speculative gambling system where it was impossible to lose. Only, it turned out to be all too possible to lose, and lose massively while creating nothing and consuming all. Even the investments in American business did not generate jobs and prosperity. Corporate profits just two years ago where at an all-time high and these profits were used to buy back stock, a move that only enriched the wealthy and inflated the market's value.
By ever measure of wealth distribution, social mobility, and class division, America has started to lag behind the rest of the first world. And now, in terms of innovation, research, and industrial power, we are starting to slip.
Stimulus is about more than creating a few do-nothing jobs. Funding for advanced battery manufacture, broadband infrastructure, and transportation infrastructure will help spurn American business. From the public sector, wise investments in companies willing to grind out modest profits while supplying high-quality products and employing highly-skilled workers in high-potential industries will be the lifeblood of recovery. Strong, stable companies are required to provide America the rock-solid base from which to take flights of fancy and innovative leaps. When they crash, we've lost only excess profits and learned much from the endeavor. When they soar, we will be again living up to the American ideal.
Blocking Agents
During the Bush years, if you dredged really, really hard you could find an insane liberal who would claim they wanted the Iraqi resistance to succeed or for the global jihad to kick into full swing. FYI: This fact in no way validates the fervent desire many high-profile and common Republicans have to see America burn simply so that they can pretend they were right. Let’s face it. Even if everything Obama does proves to be misguided and plain wrong, that does not mean Republicans were right.
We have been brought to this point not by the acts of one man over the last month. It was not been the acts of a small cabal over the last eight years either. For the last thirty years, interests that have been mostly supported by Republicans but have found their supporters in the Democrats as well have pushed us to the brink and now over it. For all its flaws, consumerism has been responsible for the best years of American growth and prosperity. The consumer culture fueled the information age, but the people at the top have forgotten that consumerism does not function without a stable and growing consumer base. No, for the last 30 years the wealthiest Americans have been pushing an agenda of “bite the hand that feeds you.” A massive redistribution of wealth has taken place from the low and middle classes, straight to the top.
Do not fool yourselves, the rich have not gotten richer based on their hard work. Massive tax cuts, deregulation that allowed short-sighted but massively profitable practices, and a culture of acceptance, indeed praise of extreme greed have made the top 1% return to pre-1930 levels. I do not exaggerate. The wealth distribution in this country is at a spread not seen since the robber barons. But the great thing about America is that anyone can work hard and be a member of the rich, right? Wrong. America currently lags behind much of Europe in social mobility. Much maligned Europe, home of the do-nothing socialists, now beats America in fulfilling the American dream. This once great nation has fallen victim to the worst of the traits we tell grade-school children Americans stand so proudly against.
And now, the party that told us for years that to question the President in a time of war was simply un-American are rooting for this country to burn. They don’t have a better plan. Their plan accelerated the end. The Japanese say business is war. To Americans, this conjures images of doing whatever it takes to get the advantage over the competition and striking ruthlessly to dominate the market. This is not the case. Business is war because failure means defeat; defeat of the country, defeat of the culture, defeat of the ideals.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)