Do you remember Albert Einstein's "Unification Theory"? Well, he is not the only one who has a "Unification Theory"! Yours truly also has one, but it is not about Physics. Is is about the social organizations of us humans. I think that most people are confused by complex systems until some one comes along with a simple theory that connects the dots. Newton did this for mechanics and from then on astronomy was not a mystery, nor were many other areas of science. A good theory that does a good job of connecting the dots moves the human race farther along than all the Kings, Presidents and armies of the world ever did. Don't think so? Think again.
First off, complex systems are not a function of just one variable. This isn't what most one movers think. When Clinton was President, we had higher taxes rates than we do now, yet the economy was doing well. This is an example of one mover, one variable thinking. The problem for the human race is that most are one movers and think this way. Complex systems are functions of many variables, but some are more significant than others. Small changes in the important variables can have a big impact on the total system while large changes in less significant variable may have little or no affect. Further, the affect of changes in variables is a function of the "state" of the system. If this seems a little complex, it is because most systems are complex.
Now, I am, getting to my point. For this blog, I am going to deal with two types of control systems Centralized and Distributed. An example of a Centralized control system would be where the King has total authority and runs everything. Distributed would be where there is no King and each person or family goes about taking care of their own needs. Both of the these systems can work and work well, but not under all conditions and that is the point of this blog.
I blogged before that Bees and Ants operate on a Distributed control system. Each member does his own thing without being told or commanded. This is a jump in logic, but I will go on to prove this to be a fact. Very large systems function best when organized as Distributed control system. It would be like the "invisible hand" that causes big economic systems to work. Remember that one? How about our environment? It has functioned for millions of years as a Distributed control system. I often use Darwin when I refer to this type of system because most people need to feel there is some single master controller, but there is not.
An example of a Centralized control system that works is the family unit. Look at a Mormon family or a Jewish family. These are normally small systems controlled by a strong central figure. I think that you have to agree that these units of control have worked very well. Look by contrast at the Black family here in the USA. They tend to have weak family units and thus have not done well. The point here is that these are small Centralized control systems and notice also that the members of these small units have less freedom and have to conform to rules handed down by the strong central figure. Notice also that this is not the case in many of the Black families and notice also the results.
Here is where it gets interesting. We all can agree that strong central control works well in these small family units and it also works well in slightly larger systems, but as the size of the system gets larger and larger, it works less and less well. Here is where I feel we go wrong. We all agree that strong centralized control systems work well for small units and we conclude that if it is not working as well as the system gets bigger, it is because the centralized control system is not strong enough or does not have enough authority. If it worked so good when things were small, then why is it not so good as things get bigger? That is the point. The "state" of the system has changed as the system has gotten larger and variables that were significant in the smaller system are now less significant or have turned negative. More can be good up to a point and after that it can become negative. This is one simple principle of complex systems. With a human population of mostly one movers, this is the problem. If you are not getting the point, I will go on.
Size makes a big difference in terms of which system tends to work best, but there are other variable too. How about "spending ones own money"? Who does it best? I don't think I need to push that point. In which system is there the most money being spent by the people who did not earn the money? That is clear. It is the centralized control system and the bigger the system gets, the more of the wealth generated by the system is spent by those who did not earn it. Creating wealth is one of the most important functions of a human system, but how that wealth is used is equally important. If the system tends to squander that wealth, the total system will be weakened and may perish. A side point about centralized control systems is that central controllers tend to grow faster than the rate that the total system grows. If that is a fact, in the limit, the centralized control system will eat up all the wealth of the system can produce and the system will perish. This is what happened to the Greeks and the Romans and to some degree the Native American societies of Central America. The centralized government that was not creating any new wealth ate up the smaller and smaller amount of wealth being generated by the worker Bees.
A country is a lot like a large business. Did you ever notice how well a company is doing when they are in a growth mode, but when they get mature they mostly go down hill? Look at IBM or ITT, these were some of the top companies 40 or 50 years ago, but where are they now? When a company is growing they are hiring new "good"people so the ratio of producers to dead wood is good, but when things turn down, no new "good" people are added and the ratio of good to bad turns against them. It is a little like that for the USA. When the economy stops growing or slows down, the growth of the central governments keeps growing so that in the limit the ratio of government workers to the real wealth producers goes up. In this state, the government eats up all the wealth produced by the worker and the society dies.
There is one last element that needs to be discussed and that is this business of "gaming the system". This is theft or stealing, no matter how you put it. The problem with gaming is that it becomes easier and more rewarding to the thief as the centralized system gets larger. There is more money in the basket and there is no one who is watching it. It is like a epidemic. Once it starts, it gets worse fast and is almost impossible to stop. If you have your eyes open, you know this is true. We have so many dogooders in Washington DC creating honey pots that call out for gamers and we have them in Spades. You don't see the gaming in the Distributed systems to near this degree because the ones who produced the wealth are the ones who are protecting that wealth.
Here is the bottom line. What we need to do here in the USA is to first recognize that more authority in Washington DC is not the solution and that we need to gradually take authority from Washington DC and get it out to smaller control systems like states, counties, cities and individuals. To do that, we have to accept that centralization has not worked, even though it did work well in small units like families. There will be things that are different from small unit to small unit, but that is a small price to pay compared to the cost and certain collapse of the centralized control system. Things like speed limits come to mind or drinking age. There are a lot more, but I think you get the idea. The medicine of Centralization or central authority is worse than the disease that is was intended to cure and that is the bottom line!
PS------It was very interesting that John Stossel had a show a couple of days later about this same topic. He pointed out that the free market did much better job in most cases than our expensive and repressive government. He showed how Wikipedia was as good as Encyclopedia Britannica and it was "free" and relied on volunteers to edit the material. Great!
PS----An other point. Notice that the Soviet Union failed when it tried strong central control while its competitors used a weaker central control system and relied on distributed free enterprise control more? The same thing happened in China. There is now "less" central control, but still too much. What Obama is trying to do in the USA is exactly the wrong thing. He is killing the USA and he knows it.
