The Blogosphere as Spontaneous Order
Published by Yazad Jal December 1st, 2003 in Web World, Anarcho CapitalismIn two superb posts, Jonathan Wilde at Catallarchy describes how the blogosphere is an excellent example of free market anarchy and spontaneous order (or kosmos as he calls it).
Even without a central command apparatus, the blogosphere, rather than being chaotic, is a dynamic, living, breathing, adapting, and most of all, structured organism. (italics in original)
Needless to say, read both the posts.
This “structured organism” is a working mechanism. Ravikiran earlier mused about the lack of such a mechanism in government. The reason for that is simple. A spontaneous order develops from the interactions of millions, and uses the special knowledge each individual has in this network. It is impossible to distill this knowledge as a collective or to predict what the world will be like in the next five years. The only way a successful mechanism can be built is by unleashing the “chaos of competition.” Remove the monopolies that government enjoys, and we will see the revolution in governance.
This is the second piece this week on anarcho capitalism. Well, it is this blog’s main focus.
Anarcho Capitalist Libertarian.
I have seen many libertarian posts on the beauty of Spontaneous Order (SO) but I find them most to be largely misinformed about the true nature and mechanics of SO. I highly recommend that you read a book called Sync by Steven Strogatz a pioneer in the field.
It starts with a beautiful illustratin of how is it that thousands of fireflies all flash in perfect sync despite not having a leader or any perceptible structure. The short answer is that each firefly takes cues from its neighbors who in turrn do the same from theirs and the end result is an ordered system with a thousand fireflies all flashing in sync.
Libertarians and anarchists immediately seize on this as some sort of proof that there is no need for government and humans too will find sync if left to their own devices. The fundamental issue that they ignore (which is really the basis of SO) is that every firefly is genetically programmed to take a cue from its neighbor and adjust its flashing to be in sync. This rule is programmed into its DNA and in that respect every firefly is virtually identical in its need to get into sync with others. The real ’spontainity’ here is not that they all magically flash together but that the entire system can be ordered without any one element viewing the whole but only elements in its immediate vicinity. This does in anyway lead to the conclusion that many libertarians love to draw that there is no need for any control in the system. There is in fact very tight control hardwired into every firefly and it really has no choice whether to obey it or not. In fact the very fact that it has no choice BUT to get in sync with its neighbor is the very fundamental basis of SO being established.
He also talks about in an experiment where genetically engineered fireflies were introduced which did not have the ability to flash. Sure enough when a sufficient number were introduced (which did not follow the rules which all the other did) the system went totally out of sync with groups of disjointed fireflies flashing out of syn with each other.
This can be corrected by placing strategically positioned LEDs which flash at the same frequency and within seconds you can bring thousands of fireflies back into sync.
When you try to apply SO to economic/political situations you forget that there is no universal rule (like the fireflies have in their DNA) which forces all humans to act in a particular way. Each will act in its own way (based on economic, political, social and religious priorities)and the result will be an out of sync system (like the fireflies where some could not flash).
I see the role of the government as being that of the LEDs which need to be strategically placed in areas that are out of sync to bring them into sync with the rest of the system. It does not need to replace the fireflies but is needed where they are out of sync to accomodate for their neighbors who cannot flash.
A spontaneous order develops from the interactions of millions, and uses the special knowledge each individual has in this network What if the people are not willing enough to participate in this network for governance?
Yaz, I used to talk abt a book by Capra “Web of Life” remm. That dealt with this problem of order in chaos. how the most smallest of organisms contribute to a bigger picture of system without actually being aware of it.
Ck,
I agree with your point that the firefly example is too simplistic and shortsighted to be a good one for libertarians and anarchists to latch onto. In fact, if one thinks more deeply about it, it’s actually a very bad precedent for libertarians and anarchists to latch onto, since the synchronized flashes of the fireflies represent a degree of homogeneity and conformity that, I suspect, most libertarians/anarchists would find abhorrent should it be manifested in human society.
However, the point made in the linked post is much stronger and not so easily destroyed by the same criticism. In the example of the blogosphere, there is (presumably) no guiding control hardwired into the various actors, yet there is still a striking amount of structure and organization within the system as a whole. That’s not to say that there aren’t still some subtleties that make it an imperfect example (the broader legal context, the artificiality of the medium, the strict limits on how much people have to interact with it, etc.), but I think it does work as an indicator that spontaneous order can arise from the basically unregulated interactions of people.
CK,
As I have not used the firefly example, I won’t waste time defending another one of your straw men.
Each will act in its own way (based on economic, political, social and religious priorities)
very true.
and the result will be an out of sync system.
not at all! As Wilde shows, the system is not out of sync. It works well, without requiring a government. Regulatory or quasi regulatory organisms rise spontaneously, like he showed with Technorati or Blogrolling.
In both the sporting example and this that I’ve quoted on the blog, we are just showing parts of how an anarcho capitalist society would work. The blogosphere and the rugby field seems to be anarcho capitalist. Further study might tell us if these templates can be used more widely to develop an anarcho capitalist society.
Ashwin,
There would be many such networks of governance in an anarcho capitalist society. You could choose to join one, many or none. Today, we don’t have a choice.
I’ve bought Capra’s Web of Life, but haven’t yet started reading it!
Dear Yazad
I am well aware that you did not bring up fireflies but if you have read any ’scientific’ work on SO (as opposed to blogs on random websites) you will realize that most of the early work on SO was done using fireflies as an example and were studied in detail in the field. The actual experimental work was done using phased oscillators in a laboratory which were used to work out many of the rules of SO.
Before trying to extend SO to economics and politics it would do you a world of good to first understand the rules, limitations and assumptions that underly SO. I only used the fireflies example as I though you would be a bit overwhelmed if I introduced oscillators and the Kuramoto model of incoherence in an equilibrium state.
I know its all very exciting for you what with SO and rise of order without leadership but try to understand the science before you try to apply it to your beliefs.
I am aware of the work on fireflies and the subsequent findings that you have spoken about. The argument for spontaneous order has moved forward from that early phase.
Two examples were given on this blog: the blogosphere and sports. I am currently going to restrict myself to discussing those. Do you see any flaws in these specific arguments?
Right now I am abstracting from “reality” — looking at real world examples of what might be sp order and then seeing how (or if) they fit with existing theory.
And don’t worry about overwhelming me.
I am glad that you clarified that you were restricting your analysis to blogs and sports and I see no flaws in the reasoning o the two and apologise if you thought otherwise. Thought the last line of your post:
“The only way a successful mechanism can be built is by unleashing the “chaos of competition.” Remove the monopolies that government enjoys, and we will see the revolution in governance. ”
…would only naturally lead one to believe that you were extending the scope from an analysis of the phemomenon of Blogs and rule making in sports to monopolies, the mechanism (or lack thereof) in governance and the coming revolution in governance. A bit of a leap of faith for all your readers you will admit - SO in blogs and sports to a new world order ;)
Ck,
I did mention this as well:
Let me clarify. You agree with me on the sports and blogosphere examples of sp order. I am looking to extend the argument to governance.
The reason I restricted myself to the two examples was because I thought you disagreed with them. I wanted to stop there, engage with your dissent on them (and try to convince you otherwise ;-)
As that is not the case, we could go forward. Look out for more posts in this vein.