Abstract:
Coordination of the interests of the individual and the interests of the collective is probably the appropriate approach for a Poliocratic model for security. Economy, from the perspective of a human observer, is more complex than we often appreciate. The dynamics between individual and collective have deeply rooted behavioral, biological and psychological predispositions to contend with. Maximizing security in a complex social structure probably means not only careful consideration of predispositions, but also accommodation of them. Thousands of years of errors have given us an opportunity to analyze our experiments statistically; and create awareness concerning expected issues. Distributing support for the various sub systems, as evenly as practical, probably requires an understanding of the biological entities that compose them; and the ones that analyze them as well.
Interplay Between Individual and Collective Security:
The behavioral sciences all seem to agree that the cornerstone of individual security is the combination of needs being met, and absence of traumatic experiences. It may be untrue that an individual could have personal security inside themselves. The ability to behave coherently with ones immediate environment seems to require that the immediate environment behave coherently. We humans can become pathological when trying to cohere with an incoherent immediate environment. Though there is some degree of natural insight in our behavioral predispositions, an individual, as an observer is also predisposed to coordinate with their environment with little to no condition. This is in essence the engine of the cycle of abuse. It’s the abused treating others as they themselves have been treated. Pathology can be passed along with the individual will to cooperate with even a destructive environment.
Destructive aspects in complex societies appear to have the ability to persist strongly against normative influence, for extended amounts of time. This may be because of the human predisposition to accept their place in society; even when it’s apparently destructive to some degree. Though Entropy is the bulk of interaction in general, normative influence is more persistent than discrete forms of disorder. It’s likely that normative influence will eventually solve many of the issues with complex societies through the suffering of consequences, but positive utility might play a role as well. This of course would require a model for such positive utility. It would also require some form of incentive to implement it; which leads back to the consequences.
The human race is a rather robust biological system. We don’t often realize just how capable and resilient we really are. We can abide harsh conditions as our ancestors did in the wild. This probably translates to our ability to coordinate with the harsh conditions of modern times. Though we have our creature comforts, there is still instances of needs not being met, unfair treatment of numbers of individuals and unprecedented disparity. These should all be expected to produce unfavorable outcomes in the form of feedback loops.
Interplay Between Game Theoretical Behaviors and General Contentment:
Game theoretical behaviors appear to have limitations when specific needs are being met. In the condition of general contentment, less protesting of unfair practices is observed. The modern standard of living may be the enabler of the unprecedented disparity. It appears that improving conditions could pave the way for increasing disparity. This may be due to an upper limit of discomfort that we humans can endure. A balance between fairness and desirability of immediate conditions appears to be an effective strategy for preventing social unrest.
The possibility for positive utility in this instance exists as well. While the negative utility of the prevention of a Bastille of sorts is reasonable and even favorable, the consequences that bring about the general will for fundamental change could be taken advantage of with models for social coordination, thus again raising the standard of living, and further hardening society against social unrest. Of course society may be even more accepting of discrete instances of unfair or harsh conditions. This should probably be accounted for by those who interpret the models and analyze the data.
Meeting the needs of individuals and not exposing them to pathological situations is what the behavioral sciences suggest for promoting healthy societies. It of course becomes more complex in detail. This tends to promote inner security in individuals who then do not become a security risk in society. This may be an effective approach for crime prevention. Of course there will probably still exist a percentage, though significantly smaller, of individuals that exhibit destructive behaviors and may require regulated or denied access to society in the interest of public safety; however, the behavioral sciences might be employed to treat and thus rehabilitate our most vulnerable citizens. This is already being implemented to some degree with varying degrees of success. The main issue with such efforts may be with the individuals ability to accept the help that they are offered. This might be a difficult task considering the information that the individuals previous environment has acclimated them to. This could result in identity crises; followed by grieving the person that they used to be etc. There should be an expectation of varied processes even after the acceptance of help.
Correlations Between Material Wealth and Social Accommodation:
There are distributions of interest and aptitude in all societies; due to probabilistic distributions of interactions. Where individuals have been more fortunate in their interactions and experiences, it is likely that they might have better education, health, mental health, personal resources, confidence or insight. This is probably how leaders are formed. Leaders are probably chosen by the possible advantages of investing in their strengths. Where there are individuals in society that tend to have greater successes, there tends to be a large number of individuals that try to copy their practices; in order to adopt a similar success rate. Those who experience more seemingly favorable outcomes tend to gain reverence in society and tend to enjoy more social accommodations. This tends to have positive effects upon their success rates as well.
One of the more interesting aspects of society is the will to invest in leaders. It probably has had a significant effect on the standard of living. Though there is much to be desired in modern society, investing in the visions of specific individuals has produced many modern conveniences and has made improvements in the necessities; such as healthcare and food production etc.. It has also, of course had unfavorable outcomes such as class struggles and vast disparity.
Striking a balance between the natural impulse to invest in and imitate leaders and the production of resource aggregation is probably centered around practices in the public sector. It’s the strategic policies of nation states that tend to result in the aggregation. The influence of governance on economic policy tends to promote maximized economic growth; in the interest of being competitive in global affairs. The corporate model is designed to promote the growth of the business first and foremost. This is expected to translate in general growth of a nations economy; and that tends to be the case for a time. The eventuality however is the saturation of markets. This leads to anticompetition between corporations, cornering of markets and thus vast aggregation. This is because of the continued interest in stockholder value under the condition of saturated markets. This appears to be caused by market growth rates that exceed the populations ability to accommodate them through natural reproduction rates. The markets are apparently outgrowing the population.
Interactions Between Nation States:
Competition over natural resources is a phenomenon that probably precedes written history by a large margin. Evidence of tribal raids is found in archaeological sites all over the planet; and it appears to be continuing in modern tribal societies as well. This is probably some form of proto-war; as warfare tends to be centered around competition for resources as well. During the Dark Ages, integration of finance, the nascent stage of industry, and empowerment of kingdoms was implemented; and more advanced models for such began to evolve. Much of the metallurgy that paved the way for the Industrial Revolution occurred during the Dark Ages. With the formation of the New World via the colonization of the Americas, Capitalism now had a platform for testing. The nationalistic practices that preceded the New World persisted in the will for the American colonies to become independent. This meant building a population, a military and a strong economy. One of the first and probably most dire resources was the population. The New World then welcomed all who would come and promoted distribution of personal armaments. The climate was mild in most of the provinces; so cash crops like cotton were chosen. Now the New World had a population, a potential military force and taxable goods. The distribution of armaments among the population not only made ground invasion risky, it made it unsuccessful for one of the most powerful armies in the world. Now the New World had to be dealt with as a competitive economic force. Capitalism and a new brand of Democracy were now free to be tested.
Unfortunately, the preexisting, nationalistic practices pervaded against the advisement of Adam Smith. The New World though strong was still a small distribution in the whole of global affairs. In order to be competitive, it had to play its’ strengths in much the same manner that the other more established countries did. A similar struggle is probable for any new form of socioeconomic model. To be able to see its’ potential, some degree of closure of the system is in order. This is a difficult problem as it is likely to be viewed as nationalistic; if it’s implemented carelessly. For instance, too much regulation in global economics or lack of coordination in global economics is likely to have unfavorable consequences in the context of diplomacy; as Adam Smith suggested hundreds of years ago. The modern Military Industrial Complex that has been evolving since the Dark Ages is not necessarily an immovable object. Much of the warfare that occurs today is financial warfare. Implementation of predatory loans is common among the more powerful nations. This is something that probably brought about issues like Brexit. For instance, the financial warfare between France and Germany resulted in the exploitation of romance nations in Europe via predatory loans. The advantage is aggregation of the wealth of the nations that are being exploited. The United States is also known for implementing such tactics on rising countries in South America… including Democratic states. Though the numbers of wars are increasing around the globe, the severity of their consequences on human life has been steadily decreasing. A more Capitalistic strategy of economic competition appears to be gaining momentum. Some of this may be due to modern forms of telecommunication. The world is becoming a much smaller, more connected place.
Financial competition also appears to have a shelf life as well. With the exponential advancement of technological progress, there is an observed increase in the frequency and severity of financial crises. This appears to be due to radical increases in connectivity and thus intrinsic liquidity in the market places. Transactions are occurring much more easily and rapidly; and interfaces between buyer and seller have unprecedented convenience. The complexity of the system is such that even barter is making a comeback to some degree. Connectivity is increasing; as is the number of the connected. New market models are emerging that don’t necessarily rely upon finance; and even financial models are being augmented. There is a great deal of economic change happening right now. The probable consequences of such trends is the deprecation of systems. Fundamental change appears to be occurring and seems likely to result in the obsolescence of currency systems. Economics is beginning to be more concerned with distribution as opposed to the politics and finance that it was centered on in previous centuries. This appears to be normative influence; brought about by increased complexity, population and environmental pressures.
Cyber-Security:
Cyber security in society goes beyond a nations’ or businesses’ ability to secure their mainframes. The role that personal machines play in commerce deserves serious consideration as well. The ability for individuals to protect their own data is essential in healthy economies. The current condition is one of propping up inflated markets with the prospect of increases in data collection and sales. This has had an adverse effect on the security of personal machines. The ability for large firms to collect personal data has been accommodated with producer control of personal machines. The policies that have been implemented have been a clear hindrance to securing personal machines. This has been exacerbated by new surveillance and crime investigatory policies. Personal machines are now difficult to secure as back doors exist on the bulk of them. The more extreme examples are Internet of Things devices; which are commonly, completely insecure. A large distribution of insecure devices is of course fertile soil for many types of bot based cyber-attacks. Users are also left open to many types of malware that are also automated to be distributed; and instances of such attacks, due to increases in financial issues, are becoming more frequent. Eventually the low hanging fruit is to become distributed attacks on consumers. Since producers require consumers with funds for purchases, this is an unfavorable condition; and the current trajectory is one that maximizes the issue.
The growing awareness of the frequency of crises has financial analysts more and more concerned about the production of bubbles. Currently models for data collection and sales, that emerged from a market for not only demographic advertising, but also personalized advertising, has become an overly saturated market. It boasts all of the characteristics of a bubble and has many concerned. The concerns are probably well founded considering how pervasive it is in commerce. A large percentage of companies are using data as a modern cash crop to ensure stockholder value; thus inflating the market even further. The bursting of this particular bubble is likely to have a devastating effect on the stock market itself; as so many large businesses are reliant upon it. It appears that the Internet of Things is likely to fail before it even gains traction. This appears to be the deprecation of a market model that emerged from the distribution of the radio and evolved with the distribution of the Television.
Financial factors are also inhibiting the ability of businesses to secure the data that they have collected. Security expenditures are weighed against insurance expenditures; which have to be paid with or without a breach event. This is a part of modern business that doesn’t exactly promote security as priority.
The model for security that birthed the New World is an obvious choice for securing the Technological Revolution. Distributed security measures such as encryption have the potential to secure the distribution of personal machines; thus securing the purpose of commerce. The data isn’t showing that free collection of data is having a significantly favorable outcome in commerce or law enforcement either. The right to secure personal machines should be taken in the spirit of the Second Amendment to the US Constitution.
Short Term vs Long Term Effects:
Competition in global economics and thus in the marketplace often results in races to particular conditions. This has the effect of elevating the value of short term gains. The most common model for producing short term gains is borrowing from the future. This particular model isn’t necessarily problematic as it is simply investing. It does however become problematic when the future demands excess compensation and unrealistic growth rates. The short term effect is the perception of a booming economy. The long term effect however is inflation and eventually serious crises.
Economizing between support for the various social subsystems is essential in sustaining a healthy society. Where one of the subsystems receives insufficient support, the entire system is weakened an likely to experience crisis or even collapse. A social system with competing subsystems is a system divided against itself. The long term results are clear.
Closing:
It is in the interest of all subsystems to coordinate economically with each other. The long term consequences of lack of coordination is the eventual, substantial weakening of the entire system. This of course has unfavorable effects for any subsystem. Prioritization can still be implemented; however the reality that a particular priority is reliant on the general health of the system results in a requirement that analysts account for the probable long term effects.
With consideration of Statistical Mechanics, projections of risk factors can be taken into account and argued. The probability that subsystems that endeavor to gain substantial advantage are in essence likely defeating their own sustainability is a solid argument. With respect to funding it’s important to remember that future budgets require the pool that they are drawn from; and it’s not in the interest of any subsystem to put that at risk. When it comes to security, policies can be their own worst enemy.