|
|
Musings Report 2021-8 2-20-21 Fatal Synergies, Benign Synergies
You are receiving this email because you are one of the subscribers/major contributors to www.oftwominds.com.
For those who are new to the Musings reports: they're a glimpse into my notebook, the unfiltered swamp where I organize future themes, sort through the dozens of stories and links submitted by readers, refine my own research and start connecting dots which appear later in the blog or in my books. As always, I hope the Musings spark new appraisals and insights. Thank you for supporting the site and for inviting me into your circle of correspondents.
Thank You, Patrons and Contributors!
Welcome new patrons / subscribers Ray M., Hughski and Joseph C.-- thank you very much!
Fatal Synergies, Benign Synergies
I'm the first to admit that last week's Musings was a long slog, but it laid the foundations for today's topic: why do some crises lead to systems/states emerging stronger while similar crises cause equally robust systems/states to collapse?
In other words: take two very similar political-social-economic systems/nation-states and two very similar crises, and why does one system not just survive but emerge better adapted while the other system collapses?
The answer lies in what author Geoffrey Parker termed Fatal Synergies and Benign Synergies in his book Global Crisis.
Synergy results from "interactions that produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects." In other words, 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 = 8 is linear, while synergy is akin to 2 X 2 X 2 X 2 = 16.
Parker seeks drivers of the two kinds of synergy in a variety of conditions, all of which are worthy of study, but based on what I presented last week--that systems/states exist to distribute resources, capital and agency--I think we can distill the difference between Fatal Synergies and Benign Synergies into two questions:
1. What problems cannot be resolved by the system/state, no matter how many reforms are thrown at them?
2. Which groups have a meaningful voice in communal decision-making / governance and which groups are effectively voiceless / powerless?
The first question identifies the structural weak points in the system. These weak points could have any number of sources: they could be perverse incentives embedded in the system, elites caught up in their own battles, or even a willful blindness to the nature of the crisis threatening the system.
Here's an example in the U.S. system: corporations reap $2.4 trillion in profits annually, roughly 11% of the nation's entire GDP. Politicians need millions of dollars in campaign contributions to win elections. Those seeking political influence have not just billions but tens of billions available to buy influence. Those needing to distribute political favors will do so for mere millions. This asymmetry cannot be overcome. Indeed, the past 40 years have witnessed an increasing concentration of wealth and power in corporations and their lobbyists and a decline of political influence of the masses to near-zero. Every reform has failed to slow this momentum, which is constructed of incentives to maximize profits, gain political favors and win elections.
In a similar fashion, the Imperial Presidency has gained power at the expense of Congress for decades--a reality that scholars bemoan but the reforms allowed by the system are unable to stop. So we have endless wars of choice without a declaration of war by Congress, one of the core powers of the representative body.
An analogy to these systemic weak points is the synergies of an organism's essential organs: if any one organ fails, the organism dies even though the other organs are working just fine. In other words, any system is only as robust as its weakest essential component/process.
Whatever problems the system is incapable of resolving have the potential to bring down the system once they interact synergistically.
The second question identifies how many groups have been suppressed, silenced or ignored by those at the top of the heap. If these groups play an essential role in the system as producers, consumers and taxpayers, their demand to have a say in decisions that directly affect them is natural.
Another group with understandable frustrations at being left out of the decision-making are those in the educated upper classes whose expectations of roles in the top tier were encouraged by their families, society and training. When these expectations are not met because there are no longer enough slots in the top tier for the rapidly proliferating upper classes, the group left out in the cold has the time, education and motivation to demand a voice.
In other words, those denied access to resources, capital and agency who felt entitled to this access will not be as easily silenced as those who accept their low status and restricted access to resources, capital and agency as "the natural order of things."
All the groups that are denied a voice and access to resources, capital and agency are in effect a sealed pressure cooker atop a flame. The pressure builds and builds without any apparent consequence until it explodes.
The more that power is concentrated in the hands of the few, the greater the desperation of the groups who are locked out of power. As their desperation rises, some of these groups are willing to go to whatever lengths are necessary to effect change.
The process of explosive demands for change erupting is difficult to manage once released. The system's essential subsystems may be destabilized--the equivalent of organ failure--and once destabilized, it's often no longer possible to restore the previous stability.
The change demanded does unfold, but not in the way those demanding the change expected or wanted. What they end up with is systemic organ failure, systems that have unraveled and cannot be restored without extraordinary exertions, exertions which are made more difficult in crises accompanied by political polarization in which each side feels that it's a violation of their core identity to cooperate with the enemy, much less agree to work together for the common good.
In this environment, the common good falls by the wayside and the system collapses.
In the context I've laid out, Fatal Synergies arise when access to resources, capital and agency are limited, either by elite hoarding or massive declines in available resources and capital.
Benign Synergies arise when whatever resources and capital are available are shared, if not equitably, at least in a process in which every group affected by the distribution has a voice in the public sphere and a say in the distribution.
Fatal Synergies arise when the identity of each group is based not on shared values and cooperation but on unyielding resistance to groups deemed the enemy.
Benign Synergies arise when all groups have a voice and a say in the process of distribution, even if it is limited.
Crises are constraints which reveal the problems the system is incapable of resolving. How we respond to those constraints and weak points is the difference between Fatal Synergies and collapse and Benign Synergies that generate anti-fragile adaptability and successful evolutionary responses to pressing selective pressures: simply put, "adapt or die."
Systems which cannot adapt fast enough and successfully enough to resolve novel problems die.
Highlights of the Blog
Next Up: Global Depression 2/19/21
What Poisoned America? 2/18/21
GBOAT: Is This the Greatest Bubble of All Time? 2/16/21
Presidents Day: Carter's Prescient Farewell Address in 1981 2/15/21
Best Thing That Happened To Me This Week
A tie between classic Pommes de Terre Lyonnaise (potatoes and onions with homegrown parsley--so few ingredients but so delicious) and building some new shelving for my Mom-in-Law's room. I'm not a furniture maker so I did this my usual way: with a worm-drive Skilsaw, pencil, square, chisel and a few screws. No jigs or fancy tools, just the Skilsaw, pencil lines and the pine boards. It was enjoyable to make something tangible that improved our lives just a bit.
From Left Field
Cavafy's Bed -- an overly "writerly" essay (i.e. tries too hard and it's visible) but worth a skim, as Cavafy's poetry can be revelatory....
Kolanovic: A New Commodity Supercycle Has Begun -- everyone is now saying this, so something else will happen first...
Climate change isn’t the problem, so what is? (William Rees)
Toasters are Toast: Thomas Thwaites' book, “The Toaster Project” -- try making anything that is mass produced and you find it's impossible....
Dramatic discovery links Stonehenge to its original site – in Wales
The Problems of Authenticity Under Capitalism--or socialism...
Corn belt farmland has lost a third of its carbon-rich soil-- fields are dead without vast quantities of chemicals...
The End of the Megamachine: A Seneca Cliff, by any Other Name, Would Still be so Steep.
A failure of complexity-- exploration of the vulnerabilities of mega-cities, well worth a read...
N.J. experts fear ‘perfect storm’ on the horizon as 7 new coronavirus strains discovered in U.S.
Energy expert predicted Texas power grid would collapse like the Soviet Union
Angels in Heaven - Chris Rodrigues & the Spoon Lady (4:15 min) (via LaserLefty)
"You do not merely want to be considered just the best of the best. You want to be considered the only one who does what you do." (Jerry Garcia)
Thanks for reading--
charles |
|
|
|
|
|
