indy on regen viability ness
indy johar on regenerative viability ness
via 2 michel bauwens tweets [https://x.com/mbauwens/status/2063834584027164987?s=20]:
An excellent brief by @indy_johar on
* Systemic Corruption
and [https://x.com/mbauwens/status/2063835133384528040?s=20]:
Significant excerpt:
==The Solution is not Purity but Regenerative Viability
== “The alternative to systemic corruption is not purity. Purity imagines that corruption can be eliminated by cleansing the system of bad actors, bad incentives, or bad practices once and for all. But living systems are never pure. They are dependent, unfinished, vulnerable, and constantly exposed to change.
to me.. this is ‘purity’ from ie: bad actors/incents/practices.. because no more need for khan filling the gaps law et al.. we just have no idea what legit free people are like.. what people are like when their missing pieces are restored/returned/uncovered..
black science of people/whales law et al
*The true alternative is regenerative viability. Regenerative viability is the capacity of a system to preserve itself by renewing the field on which it depends. Where systemic corruption preserves identity by degrading the field, regenerative viability **preserves identity by restoring and strengthening the field.
*via google – viability: ability to survive/work/live successfully.. to me.. that’s just more (same song) of perpetuating survival triage.. so to me.. not a legit/true alt.. what we need is a means for legit life over survival ness
**to me.. this is a cancerous distraction.. ie: identity ness et al.. how to have an id if always changing .. unfinished.. ie: the it is me ness.. graeber unpredictability/surprise law.. graeber can’t know law.. et al
A regenerative system does not treat truth as annihilation. *It creates conditions in which truth can lead to adaptation. It does not treat feedback as betrayal. **It treats feedback as intelligence. It does not treat relation as weakness. It understands relation as the ground of viability. It does not preserve identity by refusing transformation. ***It preserves identity by becoming capable of transformation without collapse.
*to me.. these are not the conditions we need.. they are not the conditions for legit free people.. ie: who decides what truth is.. et al.. again.. graeber can’t know law.. et al
**intellectness as cancerous distraction.. perpetuating feedback loop is broken ness.. perpetuating the death of us ness.. perpetuating the same song.. the whac-a-mole-ing ness of sea world.. of not-us ness.. of part\ial ness.. perpetuating survival triage.. for (blank)’s sake..
note: on survival ness: survival is a means to survive things as they are.. so to me.. not a legit alt.. it’s triage.. perpetuating survival triage.. so a temp band aide per se.. that will /can help now.. but only for short term.. because it still doesn’t get to the root of the problem.. so it won’t offer/lead-to legit change/life/freedom.. et al.. so.. to me.. it’s still a cancerous distraction to the dance
**to me.. capable of transform w/o collapse ness is embracing uncertainty.. it’s antifragile ness.. it’s not preserving anything .. esp not id
Regeneration therefore requires *more than ethical instruction. It requires the reconstruction of viable fields. **It requires enough slack that actors are not forced into panic. ***It requires forms of accountability that make repair possible without erasing consequence. It requires adaptive identities that can admit failure without disintegrating. ****It requires distributed perception, so reality can be sensed from more than one centre. It requires incentives that reward renewal more than extraction. It requires shared meaning, so action can once again connect identity, relation, and future.
*aka: people telling other people what to do.. oooof
**’slack’ won’t be ‘enough’ until we try the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
[‘in an undisturbed ecosystem ..the individual left to its own devices.. serves the whole’ –dana meadows]
there’s a legit use of tech (nonjudgmental exponential labeling) to facil the seeming chaos of a global detox leap/dance.. for (blank)’s sake..
ie: whatever for a year.. a legit sabbatical ish transition
***oi. huge cancerous distraction.. perfect ie of people telling other people what to do..
****how is there not ‘one centre’ if there’s still ethic ness and accountability ness and consequence ness and incentive/reward/meaning/id..et al?.. that’s coming from some ‘one centre’ ness
Regenerative viability is not softness. It is the opposite of brittle survival. It is a stronger form of continuity because it renews the conditions that make continuity meaningful.”
*to me.. it’s the same song as brittle survival.. aka: perpetuating survival triage et al.. if we don’t let go of meaningful ness.. again – graeber can’t know law et al.. and continuity ness.. graeber unpredictability/surprise law et al..
we need to try a legit nother way if we want to get to the root of problem
legit freedom will only happen if it’s all of us.. and in order to be all of us.. has to be sans any form of measuring, accounting, people telling other people what to do
notes/quotes from indy’s substack:
At the Edge of Viability – Systemic Corruption, Existential Viability Stress, and Regenerative Fields (june 2027)
1. The Misreading of Corruption
We misread corruption when we treat systemic corruption as if it were merely everyday corruption. *Everyday corruption is a violation inside a system whose basic order is still assumed to be functioning. It is the bribe, the abuse of office, the hidden transaction, the manipulation of process, the private capture of public responsibility, or the betrayal of entrusted purpose. In this frame, corruption is understood as an exception to the system: a bad actor, a failed rule, a weak control, a moral defect.
*aka: sea world
Systemic corruption is different. It is not simply corruption occurring at larger scale. It is a different condition. *Systemic corruption begins when the field in which actors operate no longer supports the forms of action it officially demands. The rules may remain visible, the language of legitimacy may remain intact, and the institution may still describe itself through its stated purpose, but the practical conditions that make non-corrupt action viable have weakened or collapsed.
*to me.. systemic corruption is deeper.. aka: missing pieces; almaas holes law; et al
In everyday corruption, an actor breaks the rules of a system. In systemic corruption, the system can no longer reproduce itself through its own legitimating rules. The issue is no longer only that people are violating the order. The issue is that the order itself has become internally contradictory. It asks actors to behave truthfully, reciprocally, openly, or legitimately in a field where those behaviours may no longer be survivable.
The first claim, then, is this: systemic corruption is not merely a failure of morality. It is a failure of viability. It emerges when the conditions that make meaningful, legitimate, non-corrupt action possible are no longer reliably reproduced.
were they ever?.. should they be? i don’t think so.. i see thinking that we have to have meaning/legitimacy/reliability/reproduction as a cancerous distraction.. we need a means to get/back to the dance of no conditions
2. The Degenerative Field
Systemic corruption begins in a degenerative field. A field is the wider environment of relations in which actors operate. It includes trust, legitimacy, resources, feedback, shared meaning, institutional credibility, material security, social cooperation, and a believable future. No actor operates outside such a field. A state, corporation, institution, community, or person is always sustained by relations that exceed it.
if it included trust.. the rest would become irrelevant s.. and so to us .. trying to get back to the dance.. cancerous distractions
A field becomes degenerative when it no longer renews the conditions of viable action.
again.. what we need are the conditions for people to be legit free.. because what we need most is the energy of 8b alive people
humanity needs a leap.. to get back/to simultaneous spontaneity .. simultaneous fittingness.. everyone in sync.. the dance
3. The Constriction of Meaningful Optionality
As the field becomes degenerative, meaningful optionality begins to constrict. This does not mean that actors have no choices. They may still appear to have many options. But the options that preserve truth, legitimacy, reciprocity, identity, and future viability become harder to sustain. The field remains active, but it no longer offers enough viable pathways for meaningful action.
not getting to the root of problem
how we gather in a space is huge.. need to try spaces of permission where people have nothing to prove to facil curiosity over decision making.. because the finite set of choices of decision making is unmooring us.. keeping us from us..
This matters because corruption often emerges not when actors have no options, but when their meaningful options become structurally compromised.
again.. rather when life boils down to options.. finite set of choices of decision making.. killing us softly with same song
4. Existential Viability Stress
5. Systemic Corruption as a Defensive Operating Regime
6. The Defensive Operations of Systemic Corruption
7. The Recursive Degeneration
8. Why Reform Alone Is Insufficient
9. Regenerative Viability
The alternative to systemic corruption is not purity. Purity imagines that corruption can be eliminated by cleansing the system of bad actors, bad incentives, or bad practices once and for all. But living systems are never pure. They are dependent, unfinished, vulnerable, and constantly exposed to change..The true alternative is regenerative viability.
this is the part michel posted.. so my response top of page
10. The Final Provocation
The central question is therefore not only, “How do we eliminate corruption?” The deeper question is, *how do we build fields in which actors do not need to become corrupt in order to survive? **How do we create conditions in which truth is survivable, reciprocity is viable, accountability is reparative, feedback is usable, and transformation does not feel like death?
*ie: the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
[‘in an undisturbed ecosystem ..the individual left to its own devices.. serves the whole’ –dana meadows]
**rather conditions in which we are all free.. ie: sans truth, survivable ness, reciprocity ness, accountability ness, feedback/adapt ness..
aka: sans any form of m\a\p
The old thesis of survival says: when the field becomes hostile, preserve identity through control, extraction, concealment, coercion, and closure.
The new thesis must say: preserve identity by regenerating the field that makes identity meaningful.
rather.. need to let go of identity/meaning/thesis ness et al.. so that we can dance to the rhythm of what is already on each heart
ie: need means (nonjudgmental expo labeling) to undo hierarchical listening – so we can hear what’s already on each heart as global detox in order to org around legit needs
The task is to move from systemic corruption to regenerative viability: from survival by degradation to survival by renewal.
so still same song.. the whac-a-mole-ing ness of sea world.. of not-us ness.. of part\ial ness.. perpetuating survival triage.. we need something legit diff.. for (blank)’s sake..
there’s a legit use of tech (nonjudgmental exponential labeling) to facil the seeming chaos of a global detox leap/dance.. for (blank)’s sake..
ie: whatever for a year.. a legit sabbatical ish transition
_______
_______
______
_______
_______
_______
_______
________
_______
be you. 