Why Freedom systems win .

Why Freedom Systems Win
Andre Willers
12 May 2012
Synopsis:
Long-term Freedom increases because it allows the self-assembly of local pockets of excellence . These bubble out , forming the new base . The process then repeats .
Discussion :
This is a complex process , involving Information availability , speed of access , protection of pockets of excellence , protection of bubbles expanding , etc .
It is easiest to illustrate it with examples from our recent history : (in descending order of importance).
1.USA vs USSR (WWIII)
To be more precise , the USA Military Industrial Complex vs the USSR Science Cities .
Both evolved stimulated pockets of excellence . But the killer app for the USA system was the evolution of DARPA , which added a whole extra degree of freedom compared to the USSR Science Cities . One need only to look at Oracle , Internet ,Irridium ,Siri . Not an optimal system , but much more efficient than directed research as practised in the USSR Science Cities .
DARPA is a sort of “Skunk Works” on steroids . Bubbles of excellence all over the place .
Note that this did not lead to physical war , although the losers lost badly . Why ? An exercise for the Reader .
2.Hitler vs The Rest . (WWII)
The First Nuclear Weapons .
See Appendix I below .
Directed information can have great short-term advantages . But unless the advantage is so great as to offset future pockets of excellence forming , the long-term freedom systems will win (Might be a bit tough in the short-term , though)
This principle can be clearly seen in the development of nuclear weapons .
The Manhattan Project’s team of scientists assembled themselves . The actual project had been initiated long before Einstein’s letter . If the USA had not sponsored the project , the pocket of excellence formed by the cream of Europe’s scientists would have found another backer .(An interesting Alternate History . Australia , Brazil , Argentina had the resources and political independence. What would it be like if Australia developed the first atomic bomb ?)
Once again , note how a pocket of excellence self-assembled without external direction .
The same happened with Bletchley Park .
3.WWI : everybody lost .
Notice how pockets of excellence (ie armor , aircraft , tactics) got lost . Explain why .
(Hint : Dragons’s Teeth)
4.Some older historical examples :
4.1Spain vs Dutch (ie Roman Catholicism vs Protestantism)
4.2Ottoman Empire vs Western Europe
4.3Romans vs Goths
4.4Assyrians vs Medes and Persians
The grand-daddy of Star Wars .
4.5Hittites vs Egyptians
The Great-great grand daddy of star wars , but ask Conan who the baddies were .

4.5Chinese vs Mongols .
An interesting one . Initially the advantage lay with the Mongols (12 th and 13th century) , as they had more pockets of excellence due to faster communication and pragmatism . The Corruption of Empire eroded this , until the Ming surpassed them in one of the greatest flowerings of civilization in human history . But the same Corruption of Empire eroded them


An interesting aside: The Corruption of Empire .
Don’t fix what is not broken translates into stifling of all innovation . The pockets of excellence gets pushed to the peripheries of Empire , with resulting higher returns . Capital flows after the higher yields , the Empire responds with higher taxes , conquest , etc . Eventually the trans-border entities become more capable than the Empire . The Empire is conquered , subsumed and the cycle starts again . See Lotus , Excel , Cloud .
Today , the borders of Empire have become fractal .
A typical run-up to a singularity .
When things are going good (ie you have a relative advantage) is exactly the time to use surplus capital in hiving off descendants (family) . The main point of Sex .
The run-up to the singularity will be extremely sexy (not what I expected) .
Post humans would then have many , many sexes , deliberately involving non-rational impulses . (Like using spices . Remember , spices are all poisons dressed up in small doses)

The relevance today ?
This is obvious . The allocation of resources will follow the most successful model , namely DARPA . If you dissect DARPA , you will see it is actually an example of the Ostrum principles in action . It follows all eight principles , especially that pesky eighth one (relationship with the government ) . My compliments to whoever is responsible .
I certainly did not expect this . That Ostrum Principles are already being used by the most successful institution in modern history .
May there be many imitators .
Your friendly Local Civilization .
Andre

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Appendix I
http://andreswhy.blogspot.com
Fuehrer Prinzip .
Andre Willers
5 Oct 2009

Synopsis :
Ever wonder how technophobes like the Nazi's managed to create technology that was far in advance of their contemporaries ?

Discussion :
Capitalist/Communist : Capital is allocated at the start (the top)
Fuehrer Prinzip : Capital is allocated at the end (the bottom) .

The difference can be exactly calculated using the principles of Reserves (see http://andreswhy.blogspot.com "New Tools: Reserves" or compound interest .

The Bottom :
Individuals hacked out their little niches . There was no oversight process . Each idea was judged on it's merit and the pushiness of it's sponsor . The sponsor was rewarded by resources and prestige . This leads to an explosion of different ideas .

Each leader literally pushes his ideas . Whether it is rockets , tanks , guns ,etc .

As long as the society was on a roll , it works very well . When resources become restricted , it bombs . The victors take over the good ideas .

Cf Vikings , Mongols , Nazis

Contrast this with the Capitalist or Communist process , where resource allocation is done at the capital-allocation stage . At the start . At the top .

The Bottom Line and the Top Line.
Capital control societies are Top Level control societies . You have to prove returns on an investment before any money is spent . I emphasize this .

The result is predictable . Innovation stagnates This makes room in the competition space for real bottom-line societies .

This leads to pulsed societies , with Capitalist/Communist systems alternating with Fuehrer Prinzip societies .

Evolutionary speaking , this is optimal as you get the best of both worlds .

The Napeolonic and Nazi's were the result of the European Class-system .

So is the present fundamentalist challenge (Christian or Muslim).

Old Christian and Muslim asset allocation are Top-line .
Internet , Old-Napoleonic is Bottom-Line .

Examples :
Pre-agricultural , Celtic , Bantu systems are Fuehrer Princip societies . Bottom-line counts .
Agricultural systems , Roman ,Chinese Empires etc are Top-level societies . Capital is allocated at the top .

Note that both are stagnant . They lead to optimal troughs that cannot be surmounted from internal resources .

Reminiscent of water-empires . External shocks from wealth creation destabilizes the whole shebang .

Can both exist at the same time ?
The Chinese Experiment :
Room for the small ones to experiment .
To have different districts with different growth rates . Differential Top-line and Bottom-line . Individuals can fit themselves into the environment that suits them .
The cost of capital has to be manipulated for this to work . This means the flow of capital .

The results of this has been calculated elsewhere .But as a rough estimate , capital flow is approximate to a AC current after it has passed through a rectifier .

The net bottom-line growth is about 7% . As observed . See previous posts .

The Optimal Mix :
1/3 Capitalism , 1/3 Communism and 1/3 FuehrerPrinzip
2/3 Top-line capital allocation , 1/3 Bottom-line capital allocation .
Fairly close to present world democracies . Very stable and strong .

The top-line allocation ameliorates brutal competition , without losing the benefits . The 1/3 ratios are derived from infinite progressions .
See http://andreswhy.blogspot.com "NewTools: Reserves"

Messing it up :
You have to screw up the top-line (2/3) and the bottom-line (1/3) simultaneously . The odds of getting it right is about (1- (1-2/3)(1-1/3)) = 0.78 . Getting it wrong is about 22% .
Now you too can understand human history ,.
Every dynasty has 1/5 chance of getting it wrong.
The communists is just another dynasty ,

They have to work like blazes to maintain , and it is an exponential process .

No wonder Mao did the counter-exponential thing with the Cultural Revolution .
Did it work ? The jury is still out .

The revolution
You can calculate the odds from the Optimal Mix above .This is a fractal attractor . Regardless where you start off , the end is the same . Only the speed differs .

Your grandchildren are the end-results of these attractors .

The revolutions of the heart .
Almond eyes .
The floating hand
The backward glance
Stifled yawn .

Tojours !
Andre .