I know you loathe the term, but that is social parasitism, and it feeds on our general economic prosperity (since those niches do not produce even subsistence value internally, let alone surplus). The more prosperous the society/nation is, the more ecologic opportunity for these niches. This is…
I know you loathe the term, but that is social parasitism, and it feeds on our general economic prosperity (since those niches do not produce even subsistence value internally, let alone surplus). The more prosperous the society/nation is, the more ecologic opportunity for these niches. This isn't just prosperity of the last 20-40 years, this is the modern prosperity as Deirdre McCloskey defines it (which in evolutionary terms is still an eyeblink).
Ah, maybe I confused you with someone else I read recently that had a distaste for the word - since it evokes very strong responses; along the lines of Eric Hoffer and the need for a demon (but not a god) as a focal point for a mass movement.
I have noted that the theory of surplus value is a theory of mass murder as, if you convince a group of Homo sapiens that X group are parasites and the society, and them, will be better off if the group ceases to exist, mass murder is likely to follow. And the theory has actually been used to justify mass murder.
That does not mean there are not actual social parasites or social parasitism. It is a dangerous accusation. That does not preclude it from being a true one.
Marx's view of surplus value, which was derived from Smith but very badly twisted.
I'm trying to work out Hoffer's thoughts on The True Believer with your application of social dynamics. Also, I'm fascinated with bureaucratic behavior - I think that was the first chapter in this series I read, and it hooked me. The last 20 years I've worked (just recently retired) for the US Dept of Defense, which is the biggest bureaucracy you could encounter. Those same 20 years or so, I've gone to Burning Man, and the fascinating observation over that time there is the degree to which it has bureaucratized (in terms of the entity that organizes it). It is no surprise to contemplate the dysfunctions of the defense bureaucracy - I refer to it as the system that rules the people. What is much harder to reconcile is a bunch of Bay Area hippies and technologists building a counter-cultural event that has developed a bureaucracy every bit as rigid.
The root of the issue seems to be that most people want to be led, and contra Say's Law - the demand calls forth the supply. Given my libertarian instincts (that I am unlearning) this has long eluded me.
"social niches insulated from reality tests"
I know you loathe the term, but that is social parasitism, and it feeds on our general economic prosperity (since those niches do not produce even subsistence value internally, let alone surplus). The more prosperous the society/nation is, the more ecologic opportunity for these niches. This isn't just prosperity of the last 20-40 years, this is the modern prosperity as Deirdre McCloskey defines it (which in evolutionary terms is still an eyeblink).
What makes you think I dislike the term social parasitism? Seems like a perfectly fair description of a lot of this stuff to me.
Ah, maybe I confused you with someone else I read recently that had a distaste for the word - since it evokes very strong responses; along the lines of Eric Hoffer and the need for a demon (but not a god) as a focal point for a mass movement.
I have noted that the theory of surplus value is a theory of mass murder as, if you convince a group of Homo sapiens that X group are parasites and the society, and them, will be better off if the group ceases to exist, mass murder is likely to follow. And the theory has actually been used to justify mass murder.
That does not mean there are not actual social parasites or social parasitism. It is a dangerous accusation. That does not preclude it from being a true one.
Marx's view of surplus value, which was derived from Smith but very badly twisted.
I'm trying to work out Hoffer's thoughts on The True Believer with your application of social dynamics. Also, I'm fascinated with bureaucratic behavior - I think that was the first chapter in this series I read, and it hooked me. The last 20 years I've worked (just recently retired) for the US Dept of Defense, which is the biggest bureaucracy you could encounter. Those same 20 years or so, I've gone to Burning Man, and the fascinating observation over that time there is the degree to which it has bureaucratized (in terms of the entity that organizes it). It is no surprise to contemplate the dysfunctions of the defense bureaucracy - I refer to it as the system that rules the people. What is much harder to reconcile is a bunch of Bay Area hippies and technologists building a counter-cultural event that has developed a bureaucracy every bit as rigid.
Trying to organise at scale has something to do with it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy
We tend to forget, bureaucracy is not the only way to organise states.
https://lorenzofromoz.substack.com/p/downward-resilience
The root of the issue seems to be that most people want to be led, and contra Say's Law - the demand calls forth the supply. Given my libertarian instincts (that I am unlearning) this has long eluded me.