From a systems perspective I merely see inequality as driven by self-reinforcing positive feedback loops which propel the ever increasing concentration of wealth and power, leading to social decline. I think you would enjoy reading the work of Peter Turchin, structural demographic theory and cliodynamics. I recommend his book End Times: Elites, Counter-Elites, and the Path of Political Disintegration.
Ironically, the rush to militarization and possibly war could be “a great leveler” that breaks the power and fortunes of the billionaire class
Walter Scheidel explains in The Great Leveler how the “Four Horsemen of leveling—mass-mobilization warfare, transformative revolutions, state collapse, and catastrophic plagues—have repeatedly destroyed the fortunes of the rich.”
The oligarchs are unempathetic egomaniacs, they’re desperate, and maybe they’re just plain stupid too
An Arab proverb, meaning the descendants of exceptional people generally are not.
At the very least, the descendants tend to revert towards the mean from the occasional, exceptional robber/barron who initially gathered their dynastic pile of loot. Breeding/marrying physical beauties your children can now afford to buy instead of the next generation valuing brainy mates only speeds that up.
A well-done article as always. My hesitation is about the definition, method, and procedure of "democracy" we cherish. If we continue the current way of democracy, the American way or the EU way, or the way as is in most of the Western European countries, democracy will only serve as a tool for the elites to perform mind control on the public. However, I am not yet even sure about how to describe my issue properly, so I shall not dwell on that matter.
Suppose we consider the system input as the "current status" and "intentions" of both elites and the public. The desired output is what is preferred by the elites. We can have a matrix representation of the necessary system transformation to achieve the change from input to output. The elites are elites because their inputs and their desired outputs carry far more weight than the small potatoes. In linear algebra, we can solve the transformation matrix for eigenvectors and the pairing eigenvalues. If we look at the eigenvector associated with the largest eigenvalue, we get the most influential factor in the transformation matrix. In simpler language, that is the over-simplification of a complete set of detailed descriptions of the "transformation".
My over-simplification from Nel's much more complete set of reasoning is that the most dominant factor among all the reasons to explain the choices of the governing elites is the natural want to maintain their existing "tribal wealth" for future generations. Maybe even try to earn a handsome profit in the coming events to increase their "tribal wealth". Some elites consider their tribe as fellow elites from the same circle in a country (national and racial). Some elites consider their tribe as their family trees (eg, the Rothschilds.) Some consider their tribe as their own nucleus families. In the West, the monetary elites (eg, the Rothschilds) control the political elites. In the East, usually the other way round (like Chairman Xi can choke Ma of Alibaba anytime.) However, many oriental countries have been Westernized, such as Japan, in deep contrast to the power structure of pre-WW2 Japan. And what if we accidentally get a small set of elites who consider a large chunk of their fellow countrymen as part of "their tribe"?
The concerns of the elites are certainly different from the concerns of the small potatoes. We think their intentions and strategies are wrong, they think we are irrelevant and ignorant. We protest by voting, they kill off the population by food processing and medicines, then import people from outside. For them, it is just a change of water in the fish tank, no biggies. However, the elites do need the small potatoes to play by their rules. And if the small potatoes can truly believe the narratives spread by the news media controlled by the elites, then the elites can get the small potatoes to help collect the money while selling themselves on the cheap. Superficial democracy is a great cheating game to let ordinary folks think they are in control, but they are not. This is the same as the movie Matrix trying to depict. Therefore, lying becomes the first requirement to become a politician in all political systems I know.
The most profitable narrative is outright lying, but it cannot be done all the time. Hence the elites must arrange things in sequence, with successive narratives to morph the minds of the small potatoes. We do get fresh air once in a while because the elites are not always united. If DJT and Biden/Obama have aligned interests, then we will not see the swinging pendulum. Techno-oligarchs are not different from coal-oligarch or rubber-oligarch except that they are more dangerous to the small potatoes as they hold the newest weapons in brainwashing. You google something and you are led to the results paying advertisers want you to see.
I don't have particular hatred against the political elites per se. From history, I do see the small potatoes live better lives when elites think of them, or at least do not trample on them too much. It is the monetary oligarchs who are the problem. The distribution of wealth in a society should look like a Gaussian distribution with a moderate standard deviation, as in almost all natural phenomena. But in most parts of the world, we have very distorted wealth distribution to the point that small potatoes cannot live with even the basic needs met. Part of the problem is the world population distribution greatly mismatches the resource distribution. By the time a country needs to import food, it has too much population. However, the wealth inequality inside a country is necessary yet must be monitored and controlled. Uncontrolled capitalism is a direct impediment to democracy. However, it is very hard for the very rich to realize that they are rich enough already. Instead, the very rich want to be God or as powerful as God. In a sense, his wealth has gone beyond his morality, and there is no established rule as to how to modulate this.
Of course, the real issues are far more complicated. As I said earlier, the above is but an oversimplification.
"Capitalism" and "democracy" are not very useful terms because they have no concrete definition. Wealth distribution usually follows a power law resulting in a Pareto distribution, see the Lorenz curve. Inequality is self-reinforcing because it's driven by positive feedback loops which means it tends to grow exponentially over time, leading to political destabilisation. Rising inequality leads to the bifurcation of society - the increasing divergence between elites and everyone else - eventually resulting in revolutions, uprisings, civil wars, etc. I agree that this tendency toward greater and greater inequality needs to be regulated and kept in check e.g. through negative feedback loops which are balancing/self-regulating, however these checks and balances always succumb to regulatory capture eventually. Elites just find ways around them or gain enough political power to demolish them completely. As inequality increases to unsustainable levels it leads to the collapse of society, whereby the system is overthrown or reformed, and new checks and balances are established to reset/stabilize the system. However future generations lose their vigilance and become complacent, the regulations are eventually eroded by elites who begin accumulating wealth once again, and the whole process repeats all over. So you have a cyclical process in which the balance of power shifts back and forth over many decades.
No argument about the pseudo periodic behavior of human civilization. I guess our effort at best is to delay certain portion of the cycle or squeeze that portion of the cycle to the shortest duration while trying to lengthen the duration of the better part of the cycle. Each generation has their own battles to endure.
From a systems perspective I merely see inequality as driven by self-reinforcing positive feedback loops which propel the ever increasing concentration of wealth and power, leading to social decline. I think you would enjoy reading the work of Peter Turchin, structural demographic theory and cliodynamics. I recommend his book End Times: Elites, Counter-Elites, and the Path of Political Disintegration.
Governing elites certainly are ruining the US, with Trump and Musk leading the charge.
https://dgardner.substack.com/p/what-trump-is-costing-america
https://dgardner.substack.com/p/what-trump-is-costing-america-part
https://www.theconcis.com/p/the-beginning-of-the-end-of-american
https://www.thelongmemo.com/p/europe-is-preparing-for-a-world-without
https://www.thebulwark.com/p/america-first-is-a-lie-a76
Ironically, the rush to militarization and possibly war could be “a great leveler” that breaks the power and fortunes of the billionaire class
Walter Scheidel explains in The Great Leveler how the “Four Horsemen of leveling—mass-mobilization warfare, transformative revolutions, state collapse, and catastrophic plagues—have repeatedly destroyed the fortunes of the rich.”
The oligarchs are unempathetic egomaniacs, they’re desperate, and maybe they’re just plain stupid too
https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691183251/the-great-leveler
@Liberation Lab
"and maybe they’re just plain stupid too"
----------
"Fire breeds ashes"
An Arab proverb, meaning the descendants of exceptional people generally are not.
At the very least, the descendants tend to revert towards the mean from the occasional, exceptional robber/barron who initially gathered their dynastic pile of loot. Breeding/marrying physical beauties your children can now afford to buy instead of the next generation valuing brainy mates only speeds that up.
A well-done article as always. My hesitation is about the definition, method, and procedure of "democracy" we cherish. If we continue the current way of democracy, the American way or the EU way, or the way as is in most of the Western European countries, democracy will only serve as a tool for the elites to perform mind control on the public. However, I am not yet even sure about how to describe my issue properly, so I shall not dwell on that matter.
Suppose we consider the system input as the "current status" and "intentions" of both elites and the public. The desired output is what is preferred by the elites. We can have a matrix representation of the necessary system transformation to achieve the change from input to output. The elites are elites because their inputs and their desired outputs carry far more weight than the small potatoes. In linear algebra, we can solve the transformation matrix for eigenvectors and the pairing eigenvalues. If we look at the eigenvector associated with the largest eigenvalue, we get the most influential factor in the transformation matrix. In simpler language, that is the over-simplification of a complete set of detailed descriptions of the "transformation".
My over-simplification from Nel's much more complete set of reasoning is that the most dominant factor among all the reasons to explain the choices of the governing elites is the natural want to maintain their existing "tribal wealth" for future generations. Maybe even try to earn a handsome profit in the coming events to increase their "tribal wealth". Some elites consider their tribe as fellow elites from the same circle in a country (national and racial). Some elites consider their tribe as their family trees (eg, the Rothschilds.) Some consider their tribe as their own nucleus families. In the West, the monetary elites (eg, the Rothschilds) control the political elites. In the East, usually the other way round (like Chairman Xi can choke Ma of Alibaba anytime.) However, many oriental countries have been Westernized, such as Japan, in deep contrast to the power structure of pre-WW2 Japan. And what if we accidentally get a small set of elites who consider a large chunk of their fellow countrymen as part of "their tribe"?
The concerns of the elites are certainly different from the concerns of the small potatoes. We think their intentions and strategies are wrong, they think we are irrelevant and ignorant. We protest by voting, they kill off the population by food processing and medicines, then import people from outside. For them, it is just a change of water in the fish tank, no biggies. However, the elites do need the small potatoes to play by their rules. And if the small potatoes can truly believe the narratives spread by the news media controlled by the elites, then the elites can get the small potatoes to help collect the money while selling themselves on the cheap. Superficial democracy is a great cheating game to let ordinary folks think they are in control, but they are not. This is the same as the movie Matrix trying to depict. Therefore, lying becomes the first requirement to become a politician in all political systems I know.
The most profitable narrative is outright lying, but it cannot be done all the time. Hence the elites must arrange things in sequence, with successive narratives to morph the minds of the small potatoes. We do get fresh air once in a while because the elites are not always united. If DJT and Biden/Obama have aligned interests, then we will not see the swinging pendulum. Techno-oligarchs are not different from coal-oligarch or rubber-oligarch except that they are more dangerous to the small potatoes as they hold the newest weapons in brainwashing. You google something and you are led to the results paying advertisers want you to see.
I don't have particular hatred against the political elites per se. From history, I do see the small potatoes live better lives when elites think of them, or at least do not trample on them too much. It is the monetary oligarchs who are the problem. The distribution of wealth in a society should look like a Gaussian distribution with a moderate standard deviation, as in almost all natural phenomena. But in most parts of the world, we have very distorted wealth distribution to the point that small potatoes cannot live with even the basic needs met. Part of the problem is the world population distribution greatly mismatches the resource distribution. By the time a country needs to import food, it has too much population. However, the wealth inequality inside a country is necessary yet must be monitored and controlled. Uncontrolled capitalism is a direct impediment to democracy. However, it is very hard for the very rich to realize that they are rich enough already. Instead, the very rich want to be God or as powerful as God. In a sense, his wealth has gone beyond his morality, and there is no established rule as to how to modulate this.
Of course, the real issues are far more complicated. As I said earlier, the above is but an oversimplification.
"Capitalism" and "democracy" are not very useful terms because they have no concrete definition. Wealth distribution usually follows a power law resulting in a Pareto distribution, see the Lorenz curve. Inequality is self-reinforcing because it's driven by positive feedback loops which means it tends to grow exponentially over time, leading to political destabilisation. Rising inequality leads to the bifurcation of society - the increasing divergence between elites and everyone else - eventually resulting in revolutions, uprisings, civil wars, etc. I agree that this tendency toward greater and greater inequality needs to be regulated and kept in check e.g. through negative feedback loops which are balancing/self-regulating, however these checks and balances always succumb to regulatory capture eventually. Elites just find ways around them or gain enough political power to demolish them completely. As inequality increases to unsustainable levels it leads to the collapse of society, whereby the system is overthrown or reformed, and new checks and balances are established to reset/stabilize the system. However future generations lose their vigilance and become complacent, the regulations are eventually eroded by elites who begin accumulating wealth once again, and the whole process repeats all over. So you have a cyclical process in which the balance of power shifts back and forth over many decades.
No argument about the pseudo periodic behavior of human civilization. I guess our effort at best is to delay certain portion of the cycle or squeeze that portion of the cycle to the shortest duration while trying to lengthen the duration of the better part of the cycle. Each generation has their own battles to endure.
@Nakayama
"the above is but an oversimplification."
----------
It will do as a working algorithm until one tests out as making predictions more accurately.
Play on, drummer.