A Role for Governments

Something that you might have thought you would never hear me say…as even I’m saying it, it feels like someone else put it in my mouth…and that is…

…we need MORE government, not less, as complexity accelerates…unless the 1% adopts a FLOS Lens.

However, the government we have now formed is the wrong government…because they are BS and don’t understand ideas that would show the real diversity of the people, and how individual differences need to be scaffolded in order to promote adequate levels of human dignity in an exponentially complexifying set of conditions.

Most likely, we will never be able to have the government we need until we revisit the fundamental reasons for, and reasons why government is needed.  Early on, when the world was far less complex, getting out of people’s way and allowing human endeavor to emerge produced more than adequate conditions for the tide to raise all boats.

Yet, in times of accelerating complexity, where only a few will be fully conscious of the major issues up and down the stratified democracy, a republic is probably a better idea.  This is why you see so many banana republics doing as good in many ways as the other more complex forms of participative government.  In many cases, they have fractured the complexity and manage it incompletely, but well enough to scaffold, in some ways, people where they are, instead of where we are, which requires much more capability.

There is one, or several relatively capable people in these developing countries (for whatever drawbacks that capability brings with them)…who is a supreme leader.  Even in Iran, there is one person making decisions, even though there are many layers of decision-creating authority.

The bottom-line on what could be a major work is to identify that in a complex world, fewer and fewer people can put together the delays among cause and effect, and string the variables together well enough to see how small actions create disequilibrium, and a practical loss of dignity.

In allowing an elite, which basically has earned their rights vs. being endowed with them in a society where what works is who has the best game…an elite that doesn’t understand truly that what put them there, isn’t what makes up a great society, we end up with a fractured benevolence that is not correlated to needs under accelerating complexity in a post-modern world.

In other words, private individuals are not going to realize that the vast amount of wealth they have attained is due more to luck, an invisible infrastructure, and timing than anything else.  They will continue to pretend that it was their doing, projecting that onto the rest –> thinking that with enough _____________, they can do it too.

This absolves the fortunate from getting to know their fortuitous circumstances and creates an air of I did, you can, which under load is just not the case.  We ascribe too much success to our volition and not enough to our fortunes; thus creating and scaffolding the ideas that government is the purview of the elite to direct in a manner that is consistent with their needs…and that by their acts, an invisible hand will somehow reach out and scaffold the many.

OBVIOUSLY, this is not working.

While violence may be down, humiliation is up.  While we may have shifted our notions about how we treat each other, we have now crossed into dangerous territory on many fronts, where it is becoming less probable that more, not less, will benefit in terms of the dignity of civilized living in this new calendar age.

I don’t believe this makes me a socialist, or a communist, because I don’t believe that by turning race horses into plow horses we gain anything.  However, I do believe there is a ground, and it will require the figure, or ego in that ground to reverse itself and stop taking so much credit for success, and be a little more humble about what each person needs to be, do, have and become to be a functional part of civilized society.

For truly, a great society, maybe one that is not great, but humble.

Helpful Hint: Government needs to be in the scaffolding business, not in the bureaucratic business, and the difference between the momentous leap we all are watching for, will not be related to so much a bigger and more invasive government, but a government which is required to scaffold a humbler society rather than pound their chests about being representatives of a greatest nation on earth?
Action Step: Imagine this.  Imagine that we would view government as a group of people who are most suited for, and funded by, all of us towards creating the support, resources and scaffolding required by each level of capability in our society to live their capability under contribution to the whole.  And while that would take many forms, and require a continued hard line for those who outlie too far, as to disrupt the nature of civilization in progress, we can be compassionate about those outlying individuals, knowing they exist and scaffold them earlier as well as later in their journeys.  What kind of philosophy would emerge?

Comments

  1. Mike, you don’t reference the level of government you are referring to. Here in the U.S., as you know, there are at least four levels – municipal, county, state and federal. If you are suggesting that the federal government do the scaffolding, my thinking is that I would have to disagree, It seems to me that having the federal government do the scaffolding would only add to the complexity.

    I believe the role of the federal government should be limited to those areas common to all such as defense, immigration, border security, importation, interstate commerce, etc. Since scaffolding would be unique to the individual, the federal government is to far removed, in my opinion, to create an effective scaffold at the individual level.

    It seems to me that the scaffolding of individuals should take place as close to the individual level as possible, say at the municipal or county level. It seems to me that it would be easier for government at these lower levels to more clearly identify the gap and to therefore create the most appropriate level of scaffolding.

  2. Nice pickup!

    I would say not either/or but it depends.

    Your point well taken, but…

    Scaffolding depends on resources and like the individual, the entity without enough capability to match it’s complexity will go under water, so the way we are doing things right now at the federal level is built on stale assumptions…

    That would be our first goal @F-L-O-W…to refresh our assumptions about reality and this calls for the emergence of a different value dynamic built on the scaffolding of new assumptions.

    If you wanted to host a webinar on this and grill me, I’ll expose more of my thinking.

Speak Your Mind

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.