301 - surviving the post-capitalist goop 🦠🫧
build some good communities, yeah?
Hey there, !
A bit of a wordier one today, but I like writing and reflecting so thank you for being my outlet of a journal.
I came across this great thread by famed mathematician Terence Tao on Mathstodon. It joins the legions of opinions in history from other mathematicians and scientists who think they've solved human society, but, well, I think it's not too bad.
In it, he distinguishes a number of groups whose interactions make up society:
- Individual humans
- Small organized groups (family, local social organisations, sports clubs, small businesses, non-profits etc.)
- Large organized groups (companies, governments, global institutions, large social media sites, professional sports clubs etc.)
- Large complex systems (the economy, the environment, the climate, popular culture, science and tech etc.)
(damn, sounds like the start of a Potentially Interesting post...)
He goes on to explain the pros and cons of each, but most importantly:
"...the benefits and dynamics of small and large groups are quite different. Small organized groups offer some economy of scale, but - being essentially below Dunbar's number in size - also fill social and emotional needs, and the average participant in such groups can feel connected to such groups and able to have real influence on their direction. Their dynamics can range anywhere from extremely healthy to extremely dysfunctional and toxic, or anything in between; but in the latter cases there is real possibility of individuals able to effect change in the organization (or at least to escape it and leave it to fail on its own).
I think that these sorts of groups often naturally form - with group chats, friends from high school / uni, shared interests, or otherwise. There's so much more status and, I guess, relative importance and feeling of connection in being a one-in-five member of a group as opposed to a one-in-a-thousand number on a spreadsheet in a large corporation.
His theory, then, is that:
...systems, incentives, and technologies in modern world have managed to slightly empower (many) individuals, and massively empower large organizations, but at the significant expense of small organizations, whose role in the human societal ecosystem has thus shrunk significantly, with many small organizations either weakening in influence or transitioning to (or absorbed by) large organizations...
Much of the current debate on societal issues is then framed as conflicts between large organizations (e.g., opposing political parties, or extremely powerful or wealthy individuals with a status comparable to such organizations), conflicts between large organizations and average individuals, or a yearning for a return to a more traditional era where legacy small organizations recovered their former role.
While these are valid framings, I think one aspect we could highlight more is the valuable (though usually non-economic) roles played by emerging grassroots organizations, both in providing "softer" benefits to individuals (such as a sense of purpose, and belonging) and as a way to meaningfully connect with larger organizations and systems; and be more aware of what the tradeoffs are when converting such an organization to a larger one (or component of a larger organization).
His view on the decline of small communities is interesting, I think. As I've grown older, I've observed the truth in this.
When I was a kid, we were encouraged to dream big and live large. The world is at stake across so many domains - whether it's the environment, or climate change, or political violence, or water, or wars, or wars over water, or microplastics in the water (I guess there's just a lot of water-based issues?).
And often, we're told that we can change that! Small actions lead to larger consequences lead to a better future. Even if if takes a long time, it's worth it! Remember Earth Day?
But as we grow older, I feel like the ambition to dream that way shrinks. We might adopt the habits out of a nod to 'doing the right thing', but a lot of those then become 'well why isn't [insert large entity here] doing anything about it? They actually hold the keys to power!' It might just be me, but that large complex systems level seems really difficult to change. Hell, even trying to shift large organized groups is difficult unless you're able to clamber your way to the top!
The knowledge and experience gained over time also brings into sharp focus your limited locus of control - the more you know, the more helpless you can feel as entrenched systems become roadblocks become a resigned sigh of 'that's just how the world works' - because trying to effect change in the world can feel like Gandalf arguing with the automatic feeder that he hasn't had enough food yet.
I know we did things like save water during the drought, and stay in during lockdowns, and we more or less try to recycle - but there's so much more to do. I mean, do you still observe Earth Day? I didn't even know when it was!
But, understanding the limitations of your reach can be good, too. Instead of trying to save the world, you just need to do what you can in your own corner of the world and help the people around you.
I've mentioned Mum's presidency of the Chinese Senior Citizens Club of Manningham (CSCCM) before, which is specifically for people named in the title of the group, and I bring it up because I think it's a good example of the 'small organisations' Terrence talks about. It's an incredible service for the community that gives so much purpose and joy to senior citizens in Manningham, and yet, it stays small for a reason.
CSCCM has to turn people away if they're not from Manningham, because the bigger the organisation gets, the more stuff they have to manage, and the less they can cope with the volume of people they service every week. There's a trade-off as they grow - the economies of scale might be better, and the revenue generated might be higher (which could pay for even more classes and services), but the connection to community would be impacted, which is the whole point of the club!
All of this is probably just a long-winded way of emphasizing how important community can be.
No, not the empty 'community' that corporations build to try and get you to feel like you've got a badge or another label that you can identify as, but softer things that actually give meaning and purpose to your life.
- I see my friends who become parents anchor their ship to the port of parenthood, sharing the experience with their own community of family and other new parents.
- I see my talented colleagues who leave big corporations to dabble in their own hustles - building communities around themselves that spread out to whoever they can, and feeling more of that control and purpose in their lives.
- I see small businesses on instagram struggling to exist, sell their wares and try to grow their businesses - buffeted by the winds of change and novelty and rapidly decreasing memories of a social media generation.
The fulfilment that can come from small groups - whether that's friends, family or otherwise - helps to fill that niche of purpose and belonging that can keep you going in a world that seems so much like Gandalf's feeder (heartless, cruel, stubborn, unable to be reasoned with etc.).
tl;dr: I guess the takeaway is that the attempt of building and supporting those small circles and groups around you might be a helpful reframe of your efforts if the world seems too rough. There are so many grand, complex and overwhelming issues and problems to tackle, but perhaps the best balance of care you can give is to help those around you stay afloat in this post-capitalist goop of a world.
And maybe that's all the change we need, really.
Chat soon :)
(P.S. If you've got any feedback for the newsletter, just hit the reply button!)
✔️Real Life Recommendations
- One Battle After Another - 4.25 stars - the new Paul Thomas Anderson movie is really really good - go see it asap! It's a comedy/adventure film about ex-revolutionaries and these secret societies that are all around us battling for their freedom and sticking it to the man. It's a jam-packed, wild ride of a story, yet feels shorter than it's 3 hour runtime because it paces through each section really well. There's a bit of drama, bit of comedy, bit of 'commenting on the state of the world', bit of action - there's something in it for everyone. The story keeps pulling them relentlessly onwards, and I LOVED that. There are some insanely funny performances from Teyana Taylor, Sean Penn and Benicio Del Toro - and of course, Leo DiCaprio hits it out of the park; hell, Chase Infiniti has been killin' it on the socials marketing the heck out of this movie. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.
- 🚫ANTI-RECOMMENDATION🚫: Planes Trains and Automobiles - 2.5 stars - it's a classic film that stars Steve Martin and John Candy, it's got heart, and laughs, and a whole bunch of stuff that I just did not care for at all. Over the top physical comedy, storylines that became ludicrous, and an incredible try at a tear-jerking story reveal that was LAME AF. I RECOMMEND YOU DO NOT WATCH THIS.
🚌 Adventures on the Information Super-Highway
- Your Strengths Are Your Weaknesses - it sucks when someone else has written exactly what you want to write but better, but it's awesome because someone's already written it so it saves you the time to do so.
- The Tai Lopez "Lamborghini in my garage"" guy got done for a Ponzi scheme - yup, that guy.
- Drunk CSS - this was fun because of the buttons up top that change up the css of the site!