Manifesto: On Society

For many years now I have occasionally looked at the world through a lens of "what is good for Society", as distinct from any individual or group, and where we are now has frequently fallen a long way short. Humans are of course social beings who naturally form groups, but Society is a construct that transcends any individual group. Society is the framework of expectation of behaviour humans in that Society have to each other. It is one of the largest components of Culture.

Society is important because without it we would (in our current world) die. That is not hyperbolae: without Society defining roles and expectations, nothing would happen that wasn't in an individual's interest, or possibly that of a group, but it has been shown that humans don't form successful, stable groups of more than about 100 people, because such groups depend on people knowing each other and 100 is about as many as normal individuals can know well enough. Society is the way humans have evolved to live in groups beyond the 100 person "limit". So without Society, human existence would degenerate into many tiny groups, most resources would become unavailable (because they require too much cooperation to produce), infighting and inter-group squabbles would become commonplace, and most currently living people would die. We know this - most of the "apocalyptic" movies stories are based around exactly this premise.

So Society is important, but what is it? It is a system of shared expectations which serves to both bind people together and define how they can work towards common goals without the backup of individually gained trust. Some people have referred to this as the Social Contract. So, when I go to work I trust I will be paid, and the boss trusts I will do the work they want done, even though we are not friends and have no á priori shared trust. When I go to the shops to buy food I expect the food will be fit for consumption and the trader will deal honestly, and the trader trusts that I will recompense them fairly. We acquire these expectations and grow this web of trust because we grew up in it and absorbed it, and when it breaks (as happens) we express outrage with each other as a method of shared, social enforcement. In the limit, we construct Laws and legal systems to impose a higher cost to those who break expectations of the desired behaviour patterns. Note that Laws are an expression of an existing state of Society, not a precursor to it. Equally, Laws cannot create (or improve) a state of Society on their own.

Why does all this matter and why am I writing this now? Well, one of the features of social changes in the last half-century (possibly longer) has been a breakdown in Society. Our Societal expectations are not being met, and our outrage is increasingly evident, though to limited effect. This serves to increase the feeling of outrage and pushes people into a mindset of closing down their trust circles to those they perceive as already having shared goals, that is, people that are "trustworthy". This in turn fosters an "us and them" mentality which can actively work against whatever trust remains between that group and others. A focus "by them" of forcing individual responsibility persuades many that they cannot rely on outside help, which both increases tension in both individuals and groups, and reduces overall efficiency (unlike groups, individuals cannot be good at more than a few things), both things we have seen in recent years with rising levels of fear and stagnant or falling GDP. Many people are fooled (by aforementioned "individuality" pressure) into thinking that the problem is them: that they are not working hard enough, that they are slackers. This then piles on a feeling of impossible goals and diminishing rewards. In many countries median real-terms incomes have stagnated or are falling. This increases mental and physical health stresses which combine to further reduce worker efficiency, while loss of Society at the largest scales results in food and environmental contamination in the quest for profit. Nature being a closed system, this contamination then comes back to bite us.

Dealing with these problems individually is not sufficient: just like the cause, the solution must address the basic problem or the result will be a sticking plaster that will not last and may not even cure the symptom.

Some people may equate this Society with "Social" in the political or communist sense, and while that is not correct it is not unrelated. The original ideas of the Communists (which were a long way from their supposed implementations in China or Russia) take the ideas of Society above and extend them to the next level: not merely a way to share common goals, but to share much more. I do not believe this can work in general, for the same reason that Society is needed. It can work when everyone knows everyone (but there's that 100 limit again) and the group can therefore self-monitor and self-censor, but it doesn't work at scales of thousands or millions. At such sizes the scope for bad actors to game the system increases dramatically and the ability to effectively monitor and censor behaviour diminishes.

In some countries, such as the UK, we have a Social part of government, which is these days seen as "soft" both as in "real people don't need it" and "a soft target for cuts". With my Society viewpoint I find this incredible: Social outcomes are human outcomes, and none of us -- especially the richest -- lives isolated from that even if they do live on an Island. Education and health are seen as economic drags but without either we have an illiterate, unhealthy and probably short-lived workforce that cannot cope with 21st Century demands like extensive use of computers, broad and deep knowledge, and flexible learning. "Welfare" aspects such as looking after the elderly and the young bolster people's feeling of place and the value of Society to them, which then boosts their ability to work and live, and it has been shown by researchers a countless times that a healthy and happy worker is far more effective than one who is not. Adaptations for the disabled do likewise, and in many cases bring people who otherwise could not participate in Society into it. These are not the selfless gifts of a generous leadership overly fond of laziness, but the prudent behaviours of leaders who understand how Society works and how to make it truly effective for everyone, including themselves.

Next time I will look at some of the changes we need to make.