Fuehrer Prinzip .

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 .