The world is now moving through an epoch-shifting transition, and a new system will be brought online as the $1.2 quadrillion derivatives time bomb that has cancerously taken over the western economy crashes.
Recently I've been scratching under the hood of Fascism, corporate-government "perfection" as Mussolini described, and discovered a name I was familiar with, but not in the same lane of thought I first met him. Vilfredo Pareto. I first met his name from history in learning about finance, economic theory, primarily the Pareto Principle, the "80-20 Rule" of distributions:
(preemptive apology for Wiki source, it's controlled narrative, especially controversial subjects, but for quick primer that facilitates deeper research it's a good place to start on more obscure subjects.)
This is a very interesting historical figure. Strong socialist leanings, but he kind of meandered in his philosophical thinking over his lifetime. Mussolini studied under him in 1903 as a young activist. Wiki's presentation is that Pareto grew disillusioned with socialism, other ideas he once championed, including early ideas of fascism, but it's open to interpretation. He unquestionably influenced many contemporaries and theorists since his death.
I was previously aware of his 80-20 work, but that's all. Then while reading Mussolini's biography I saw his name. And discovered he had many ideas about sociology that fit into much history and philosophy that you share.
It is in the Circulation of Elites that he expounds on ideas about revolutions. And how it's the same people in power before and after a revolution. They just change teams. This dovetails into the need to break the cycle of human organization that keeps the same people in charge no matter what the ideology is called.
Pareto's theory is consistent with the ideas of big political theory influencers like Harold Lasswell and Noam Chomsky. Of note, in Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent is this idea:
"You know, it’s very striking that continually people move from one position to the other, very easily. And I think the reason for the ease is partly because they’re sort of the same position. So you can be either a Marxist-Leninist commissar, or you can be somebody celebrating the magnificence of State capitalism, and you can serve those guys. It’s more or less the same position. You pick one or the other depending on your estimate of where power is, and that can change."
FF - I believe this is humanity's biggest challenge we face, as well as our biggest opportunity. I believe his work is worthy of greater investigation to those ends. And I'm curious as to your thoughts about Pareto, how his work and ideas may interact with your ideas and work?
Generally agree with your thesis and grateful, always, for your careful work. However I do wonder on this one: Can you have a truly open system in a flagrant and unapologetic censorship regime? US — with either wing of the uniparty — seems well on its way to joining the allies you mention… in this respect at least. Open system + top-down implementation = ??? (I’m instinctively very wary… global solutions, even derived from win-win systems, would seem prone to massive, lethal unintended consequences)
Recently I've been scratching under the hood of Fascism, corporate-government "perfection" as Mussolini described, and discovered a name I was familiar with, but not in the same lane of thought I first met him. Vilfredo Pareto. I first met his name from history in learning about finance, economic theory, primarily the Pareto Principle, the "80-20 Rule" of distributions:
(preemptive apology for Wiki source, it's controlled narrative, especially controversial subjects, but for quick primer that facilitates deeper research it's a good place to start on more obscure subjects.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vilfredo_Pareto
He's also known for his theories on optimization, the Pareto Optimal:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_efficiency
This is a very interesting historical figure. Strong socialist leanings, but he kind of meandered in his philosophical thinking over his lifetime. Mussolini studied under him in 1903 as a young activist. Wiki's presentation is that Pareto grew disillusioned with socialism, other ideas he once championed, including early ideas of fascism, but it's open to interpretation. He unquestionably influenced many contemporaries and theorists since his death.
I was previously aware of his 80-20 work, but that's all. Then while reading Mussolini's biography I saw his name. And discovered he had many ideas about sociology that fit into much history and philosophy that you share.
I believe this book is worth a read over:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mind_and_Society
Which includes his ideas about Social Cycle theory:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cycle_theory
And also brings home his ideas about the Circulation of Elites:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circulation_of_elites
It is in the Circulation of Elites that he expounds on ideas about revolutions. And how it's the same people in power before and after a revolution. They just change teams. This dovetails into the need to break the cycle of human organization that keeps the same people in charge no matter what the ideology is called.
Pareto's theory is consistent with the ideas of big political theory influencers like Harold Lasswell and Noam Chomsky. Of note, in Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent is this idea:
https://chomsky.info/19890315/
"You know, it’s very striking that continually people move from one position to the other, very easily. And I think the reason for the ease is partly because they’re sort of the same position. So you can be either a Marxist-Leninist commissar, or you can be somebody celebrating the magnificence of State capitalism, and you can serve those guys. It’s more or less the same position. You pick one or the other depending on your estimate of where power is, and that can change."
FF - I believe this is humanity's biggest challenge we face, as well as our biggest opportunity. I believe his work is worthy of greater investigation to those ends. And I'm curious as to your thoughts about Pareto, how his work and ideas may interact with your ideas and work?
Very Interesting and hopeful. But I don't know if it's very likely.
I would really like to see/hear you, and Jeffrey Sachs collaborate on this further.
Well done Sir.
Generally agree with your thesis and grateful, always, for your careful work. However I do wonder on this one: Can you have a truly open system in a flagrant and unapologetic censorship regime? US — with either wing of the uniparty — seems well on its way to joining the allies you mention… in this respect at least. Open system + top-down implementation = ??? (I’m instinctively very wary… global solutions, even derived from win-win systems, would seem prone to massive, lethal unintended consequences)
Nice analysis, Matt. Thank you.