Theme: Civilization

Jan 14, 2020, 4:27 PM by Bill Joslin (important) (riffing of post shared below) (note the multiple dimensions common in propertarian analysis) 1) Production Distribution: Whereby the square root of the population accounts for 50% of productivity (thanks Heavens Wolves for these connections). 2) Lower Power Distance = Greater Chance of Trust. Power distance index: whereby some people have a predilection to trust immediate leaders (personally known) , other are amiable to trust leaders at high distance (impersonal). 3) Lower Power Distance = Greater Agency Hierarchies that “chunk” into smaller units and delegate power (agency) into the smaller chunks, while maintaining accountability (risk) for the outcome, recursively maintain lower power distance relationships across a larger organizational structure. 4) Lower Power Distance = Easier to emulate those we trust. Lower power distance afford lower members the opportunity to emulate leaders which they have access to (my sargent, my supervisor etc) which increases their agency and calls them forward to become leaders. 5) Lower Power Distance = Greater opportunity for expression of excellence. By chunking, the square root of a smaller group, on the aggregate across many groups, produces more super performers. (a group of nine will have 3 super performers. a group of 100 will have 10 super performers – 10 groups of 9 will have 30 super performers by the standard of a single group of 90) 6) High power distance = obedience over trust. Those with higher power distance preferences, produce larger groups which delegate from one to many (one leader to 100 or 1000 men with no ranks between) 7) High Power Distance = lower agency. They do not capture the square root potential of recursive groups, which mean few super performers are available for emulation – to wit they have little to no proximity or exposure. This reduces their ability to increase agency at the same time, encourages dependence on the leaders (also known as demand for authority) 8) Western Hierarchies = produce velocity and agency. The west, via militias and presumption of individual sovereignty, has allowed low power distance individuals to organize at larger scales. in doing so has captured more benefit from the square root performance distribution. the result has been velocity. So now I can make my point: 9) Western Social Cohesion = via proximity, delegated agency, distributed accountability. This structure of chunked groups with delegated agency, bound by accountability, allowed us to emulate and respect our betters and inspires us to become them… at the same time as being able to have a higher resolution (and speed) in applying accountability. This becomes of paramount importance in maintaining cooperative class structures. Because class structures are no different from military structures Respect and reward where due, disrespect and correction where due. HOW DOES INTELLIGENCE ENTER THIS? 10) Communication breaks down across 2 Standard Deviations. A standard Deviation is 15 points. 11) Lower power distance, via “chunking” allows for IQ-capture across scales. A general (IQ 145+) communicates to a senior officer (IQ 130+) who communicates to an officer (120+) who communicates to an NCO (110+) who communicates to the soldier (IQ 85+). 12) High power distance communicates from leader to soldier whereby the leader expects blind obedience and the soldier is unable to understand context for commands. This breeds confusion and resentment whereby the leaders have no respect for lowers and lowers see leaders as tyrants. class conflict then ensues. 13) Organizational patterns: i) Centralized, ii) Decentralized, iii) Distributed i) Centralized moves organization toward high power distance relations to reap the benefits of organization at larger scales. (3rd world armies)(herd with a shepard) ii) Decentralized preserves lower power distance while scaling to larger scales. (western armies)(pack) iii) Distributed attempts to remove the centralized by clipping off leaders (antifa) and in doings reduces itself to “intelligence of the mob” (only as smart as the lowest component) (herd) 14) Leftist i.e. western liberals, coming from a culture and predisposition of a lower power distance, (distrust power at the more distant levels), attempt to organize themselves in a decentralized manner but can only achieve distribution, eventually devolve into a mob due to the dissonance between their desire for authority and low power distance predilection (from being western) That is why socialism/communism may work in China without social de-cohesion (asians being high power distance) and will not work in the west. The outcome results in the distribution of a mob (herd).

Jan 14, 2020, 4:27 PM by Bill Joslin (important) (riffing of post shared below) (note the multiple dimensions common in propertarian analysis) 1) Production Distribution: Whereby the square root of the population accounts for 50% of productivity (thanks Heavens Wolves for these connections). 2) Lower Power Distance = Greater Chance of Trust. Power distance index: whereby some people have a predilection to trust immediate leaders (personally known) , other are amiable to trust leaders at high distance (impersonal). 3) Lower Power Distance = Greater Agency Hierarchies that “chunk” into smaller units and delegate power (agency) into the smaller chunks, while maintaining accountability (risk) for the outcome, recursively maintain lower power distance relationships across a larger organizational structure. 4) Lower Power Distance = Easier to emulate those we trust. Lower power distance afford lower members the opportunity to emulate leaders which they have access to (my sargent, my supervisor etc) which increases their agency and calls them forward to become leaders. 5) Lower Power Distance = Greater opportunity for expression of excellence. By chunking, the square root of a smaller group, on the aggregate across many groups, produces more super performers. (a group of nine will have 3 super performers. a group of 100 will have 10 super performers – 10 groups of 9 will have 30 super performers by the standard of a single group of 90) 6) High power distance = obedience over trust. Those with higher power distance preferences, produce larger groups which delegate from one to many (one leader to 100 or 1000 men with no ranks between) 7) High Power Distance = lower agency. They do not capture the square root potential of recursive groups, which mean few super performers are available for emulation – to wit they have little to no proximity or exposure. This reduces their ability to increase agency at the same time, encourages dependence on the leaders (also known as demand for authority) 8) Western Hierarchies = produce velocity and agency. The west, via militias and presumption of individual sovereignty, has allowed low power distance individuals to organize at larger scales. in doing so has captured more benefit from the square root performance distribution. the result has been velocity. So now I can make my point: 9) Western Social Cohesion = via proximity, delegated agency, distributed accountability. This structure of chunked groups with delegated agency, bound by accountability, allowed us to emulate and respect our betters and inspires us to become them… at the same time as being able to have a higher resolution (and speed) in applying accountability. This becomes of paramount importance in maintaining cooperative class structures. Because class structures are no different from military structures Respect and reward where due, disrespect and correction where due. HOW DOES INTELLIGENCE ENTER THIS? 10) Communication breaks down across 2 Standard Deviations. A standard Deviation is 15 points. 11) Lower power distance, via “chunking” allows for IQ-capture across scales. A general (IQ 145+) communicates to a senior officer (IQ 130+) who communicates to an officer (120+) who communicates to an NCO (110+) who communicates to the soldier (IQ 85+). 12) High power distance communicates from leader to soldier whereby the leader expects blind obedience and the soldier is unable to understand context for commands. This breeds confusion and resentment whereby the leaders have no respect for lowers and lowers see leaders as tyrants. class conflict then ensues. 13) Organizational patterns: i) Centralized, ii) Decentralized, iii) Distributed i) Centralized moves organization toward high power distance relations to reap the benefits of organization at larger scales. (3rd world armies)(herd with a shepard) ii) Decentralized preserves lower power distance while scaling to larger scales. (western armies)(pack) iii) Distributed attempts to remove the centralized by clipping off leaders (antifa) and in doings reduces itself to “intelligence of the mob” (only as smart as the lowest component) (herd) 14) Leftist i.e. western liberals, coming from a culture and predisposition of a lower power distance, (distrust power at the more distant levels), attempt to organize themselves in a decentralized manner but can only achieve distribution, eventually devolve into a mob due to the dissonance between their desire for authority and low power distance predilection (from being western) That is why socialism/communism may work in China without social de-cohesion (asians being high power distance) and will not work in the west. The outcome results in the distribution of a mob (herd).