top of page

The Fallacy Of The People

Homo sapiens dominated the planet by utilizing large groups or systems. Systems in the evolutionary chain are not unique to humans. Bees, ants, et al. operate in a system with unique roles, a hierarchy, and the desired end state. However, humans' gift of intricate speech enhanced the power of their systems. Speech facilitated larger groups with a complex hierarchy and a stated goal. Speech also led to the passing of knowledge at a quicker rate, enabling evolution at a faster rate. Speech also facilitated critical thought, which led to the addition of a moral dimension within the system. Moral complexity within systems is unique to humans.

Systems are agnostic to the moral dimension. They only function as a framework for an organized group with a common goal. People, however, can be inherently good/evil, courageous/cowardly, or smart/stupid. Thus, the system uses rules to help govern the people within. Rules are also agnostic to the moral dimension, but rules are not within themselves moral. There are many examples of unjust rules created by people. The deeper question in a system of people is how all the individuals come together within the hierarchy, governed by the rules, to create a culture.

The culture of the system is the soul of the system. Observing the rules by themselves or the actions of only a few will always give an incomplete view. You must observe how all parts of the system interact to develop a full understanding of the complexities within the system, which provides a window into the culture. Ultimately the culture of the system, built by leadership, but lived by all within the system, heavily influences the moral dimension more than the sum of the parts.

Furthermore, there is a life cycle for each system of people. In the beginning, the system is always flexible and responsive. Generally, the system will grow in the beginning if effective. But over a long enough timeline, the system will inevitably become inflexible and lethargic. The very growth that made it effective will become a burden. The critical evolutionary question is how the system adapts to remain flexible and effective.

In a system of people, over a long enough timeline, those with power will build barriers to protect their power. As stated in #48, "power is of an encroaching nature, and it ought to be effectually restrained from passing the limits assigned to it." However, the document failed to acknowledge the contrary: those without power will lobby for new rules to facilitate the quicker acquisition of power. Neither of these characteristics are in the best interest of the collective whole.

As a result, impartiality will always be best found in the middle of the spectrum. Middle management has enough observation to understand the culture and intricacies of the system. They are not as thirsty for power as those just starting, and they are not as protective of power as those at the top. These people offer the best perspective concerning the system, and their sentiments typically reflect the system's best interest as a whole.

Systems will never be fully effective when led by people. This vulnerability is only mitigated with accountability mechanisms from the collective whole. Without these mechanisms, systems are vulnerable to double standards. The biggest threat to a system is class warfare. Class warfare occurs when the actions of one class are not congruent with the standards of another class within the system.

Power changes the rules of the system over a long enough timeline. Old, ineffective, and inflexible systems require people to challenge the system's shortfalls, not only with speech but with action. Without action, speech will not change the behavior of those at the top protecting power. Without action, the choke points will continue to get smaller and more controlled. Without action, those without power will grow more restless, and discontent as the barriers to power become more cumbersome.

Thus, any system comprised of people should encourage critical thought and speech to drive equality among the classes, which will ultimately bring harmony to the culture. Failure to do this will result in a lack of evolution and, ultimately, destruction.


14 views0 comments



bottom of page