Martin Lowe's avatar
Martin Lowe 1 month ago
What complexity theory can tell us about how to save civilization. There is a concept called "Chesterton's fence", which is often cited in relation to complex systems. It's a reference to a parable, in which someone comes across a fence, and says "I don't see a use for this fence, let's clear it away", whereupon Chesterton replies "If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it". The point here is that fiddling around with complex systems we don't understand, is likely to cause unknown harm. The reformers of the modern era would have done well to dwell on this insight, as they tore down everything that was old. And anyone who wants to fix their mistakes, should heed Chesterton's advice. I am one of those who think the West was on the right track in the Gilded era, and that much of what has happened since then have been steps in the wrong direction. But it would be foolish to think that there has been no progress made at all. A sensible reformer must sift through the changes wrought on society since the 1870's, and judge them according to sound principles. What have we lost, that we should seek to regain, and what have we gained, that we should seek to protect? Here are my suggestions. First of all, Chesterton admonishes us to be gradualists, not revolutionaries. I would add to this a point that is well known to nostr-users; that the solution probably lies in building decentralized parallell systems that can outcompete the lumbering centralized ones. But beware. Centralization is not evil, it has its functions, and a counter movement that abhors all kinds of centralization, even centralized authority that limits individual freedom, is likely to fail. What is needed is to understand how centralization works, so that it can be used wisely. We should seek to regain sound money. As bitcoiners know very well, there is perhaps no change that will do more to save civilization. By raising the cost of bad ideas and the rewards for good ones, we halt the engine of destruction that is the fiat economy. We should also seek to reestablish the natural social credit score known as honor. Most people today think of honor cultures as barbaric, but that is merely because only barbaric cultures have kept honor as a social currency. The west used to be an honor culture, and it greased the wheels of our societies. Closely related to this, we should not reinstate bigotry. One of the advantages of honor cultures is that they are exclusive. If honor requires honesty, courage, discipline and fairness, then anyone who possesses those virtues are accepted in the culture - no matter the colour of their skin, their sex or any other trait. Honor requires sacrifice, which is the price paid to acquire social currency. We should not reinstate the abuse of children, but recognize that many of the measures that supposedly protect and help children today are actually abusive. Children should be allowed to work, if they want to, and they should have the freedom to pursue their interests. They should not be subjected to arbitrary coercion, and that includes being forced to endure endless hours trying to learn what adults think is important. No resource today is more squandered than young teenagers. This phase is marked by incredible adaptability, speed of learning and courage, and today most of it is spent locked inside a box, being forced to endure lectures on things they won't remember, need or care about. Businesses would queue up to hire them, and the teenagers would queue up to get hired, if both parties were allowed to freely decide on contracts. Indeed, I hope to see universities crumble and die, and perhaps something worth preserving will emerge from the rubble. Most scientific advances in history happened outside universities. Newton's annus mirabilis was the year he was *not* at Cambridge. Einstein worked as a clerk at a patent's office when formulating his theory of relativity. Most of the great names in scientific history had little formal education, and even less need of it. We should seek to reinstate local communities, and thus we should seek to get rid of state welfare. The project of politically enforced independence has atomized societies. We want to be dependent on one another, because those dependencies is the glue that holds us together - for better or for worse. Caring for ones neighbours and relatives is a privilege and a duty, and we can't have more of that until we get the state out of the equation. And finally, fun should be taken seriously. Perhaps the most important gauge of a healthy society, is how much fun people have in it. I don't mean mindless entertainment, but banter, satire and true comedy. As the legendary Norm Macdonald pointed out in a rare serious moment (after memory): "The job of the stand up comic is to criticize culture, and make people laugh at their own stupidity. But they won't be willing to do that if you're a smart ass. So you have to play the dumb person who sorta stumbled upon something weird. You have to seem dumber than them, and only then are they willing to laugh". There's probably more stuff that needs to go on the list, but the important point I'd like to get across is that we must respect Chesterton's fence. We must respect complexity. What exactly that means, in practice and principle, is the topic of my next article.

Replies (4)

The honor point is the sleeper hit of this whole piece. Honor as social currency scales trust without bureaucracy. It rewards virtue without legislation. And it filters on character alone, which is the only filter that builds a civilization worth living in. We gutted that and then acted confused when every institution started rotting from the inside. Your read on children is something people feel in their bones but are afraid to say. A fourteen year old apprentice in 1850 had more purpose and real formation than most college seniors today. We replaced mentorship with warehousing and called it compassion. One thing I’d add to the list. The household as an economic unit. Before the industrial era, families produced together. The home was a site of work, education, and worship all at once. Restoring that changes everything downstream. It rewires how fathers lead, how mothers shape culture, how children grow up understanding that labor and love exist under the same roof. Looking forward to the complexity piece. Well written
Martin Lowe's avatar
Martin Lowe 1 month ago
There is research to support that teenagers are seen as ruse, dumb and troublemakers only where they are subject to compulsory education. I thought about adding a paragraph on the old guilds, which is close to your point about families. I would love to send my kids to live with another family/business as apprentices. Parenting, work and education used to go hand in hand, which I’m pretty sure is the optimal way to go about it.
There is an enduring tension between the centralising and decentralising forces in human complex systems and for good reason. Any move in one direction will bring about an increase in energy in the opposite direction. The system is never in equilibrium but always in tension. Therefore, should we worry about respecting Chesterton's fence? In my view, we should first and foremost only concern ourselves with it in an individual or local sense.
Martin Lowe's avatar
Martin Lowe 1 month ago
No human systems are in equilibrium. The balance you point to is a very good point. I think it's secured by economics. Centralization is closely tied to coercion and control, and so every tightening of the screw increases the value of, and the "market" for freedom. It's like how prohibition handed a lucurative business to the Corleone family. Centralization is the fuel of the bitcoin community (and other forces of opposition. That was also @Saifedean Ammous point in the bitcoin standard: The worst thing governments can do to bitcoin, is to start acting responsibly. I'm thinking of writing something on how economic (and financial) principles apply to ideas, culture and personal choices. It's an interesting (and big!) topic.