The high trust, decentralized, group problem-solving system might be called a “tribe.” High-trust tribal consensus decision making worked for human beings for millions of years. It worked so well that evolution hard-wired human brains with the capacity to have high-trust relationships within a group (tribe) of no more than about 150 people (Dunbar’s number). So we already have the capacities to re-create the system you’re envisioning. The problem(s) we want or need to solve might be framed or stated in terms of what to do with the hierarchies and hierarchical decision-making systems for deciding who-gets-what (including who-gets-what power and control) that presently pervade human society.
I def see the appeal of building a new space from scratch, but I think the problem is the assumption that hierarchy is a design flaw rather than an emergent property of scale/resource asymmetry & temporal drift. It recurs because the conditions that produce it recur.
The more relevant challenge is how to constrain and compartmentalize hierarchy when it inevitably emerges. That could mean rotating leadership, federated (but interdependent) governance, adversarial review/whistleblower channels, durable institutional memory etc., and, as you mentioned, radical transparency, which I’m big on.
Coordination models that assume trust tend to work…until they don’t. Trust-dependent systems tend to centralize when stress/pressure is applied. More interesting are the ones that function despite mistrust and resist consolidation by default.
Maybe could try to “stress-test” it first, somewhere messy, like a community/neighborhood board or grant committee. Anywhere consensus has a half-life of under 10 minutes.
My focus in on creating a foundation for a civilization built on collective purpose. Not belief, not opinion—but our common reality: life itself.
The one thing we can all agree on, beyond belief, is that we want to live. Every ideology, every identity, every dream depends on our continued existence. Beliefs only matter if we survive. And survival now requires cooperation at a level we’ve never achieved.
This isn’t about making everyone the same. It’s about creating a space where difference doesn’t destroy direction. Where purpose becomes our compass. Where intelligence isn’t feared for disrupting power—but used to protect life.
That’s what I’m building.
There are already better ideas for specific systems, and people far smarter than me who’ve thought them up. But none of that matters if we’re still trying to get the ruling class to grow a heart in order to make it happen.
💯
A new operating system is exactly what we need. And a new system that is actually capable of making change.
I'm in!
J.
The high trust, decentralized, group problem-solving system might be called a “tribe.” High-trust tribal consensus decision making worked for human beings for millions of years. It worked so well that evolution hard-wired human brains with the capacity to have high-trust relationships within a group (tribe) of no more than about 150 people (Dunbar’s number). So we already have the capacities to re-create the system you’re envisioning. The problem(s) we want or need to solve might be framed or stated in terms of what to do with the hierarchies and hierarchical decision-making systems for deciding who-gets-what (including who-gets-what power and control) that presently pervade human society.
Small circles connected to make big circles - a team of teams - and we use digital systems to connect us. The hierarchy problem is solvable.
Author Daniel Quinn called it “the new tribalism”
Here is a practical blueprint for a new operating system that would do just that. https://a.co/d/dAhH5NT
Thanks for the tip!
Check out Rudolf Steiners Social Three-folding
..
"It frees economic life from the bonds of the state"
We don’t need to wait for anyone’s permission. Thanks for the suggested read! ❤️⚔️
I def see the appeal of building a new space from scratch, but I think the problem is the assumption that hierarchy is a design flaw rather than an emergent property of scale/resource asymmetry & temporal drift. It recurs because the conditions that produce it recur.
The more relevant challenge is how to constrain and compartmentalize hierarchy when it inevitably emerges. That could mean rotating leadership, federated (but interdependent) governance, adversarial review/whistleblower channels, durable institutional memory etc., and, as you mentioned, radical transparency, which I’m big on.
Coordination models that assume trust tend to work…until they don’t. Trust-dependent systems tend to centralize when stress/pressure is applied. More interesting are the ones that function despite mistrust and resist consolidation by default.
Maybe could try to “stress-test” it first, somewhere messy, like a community/neighborhood board or grant committee. Anywhere consensus has a half-life of under 10 minutes.
I also think in these terms 😉
We all share the same unspoken stake: survival.
But our systems don’t reflect that truth.
They’re built on power, profit, and control—not the preservation of life.
We’ve placed wealth above wellbeing. Competition above cooperation.
That choice is killing us.
The correction is simple:
Value life above dominance.
Purpose above profit.
Species above system.
This one shift would transform everything we call society—
not because it’s idealistic,
but because it’s necessary before we cause our own extinction.
Agreed
My focus in on creating a foundation for a civilization built on collective purpose. Not belief, not opinion—but our common reality: life itself.
The one thing we can all agree on, beyond belief, is that we want to live. Every ideology, every identity, every dream depends on our continued existence. Beliefs only matter if we survive. And survival now requires cooperation at a level we’ve never achieved.
This isn’t about making everyone the same. It’s about creating a space where difference doesn’t destroy direction. Where purpose becomes our compass. Where intelligence isn’t feared for disrupting power—but used to protect life.
That’s what I’m building.
There are already better ideas for specific systems, and people far smarter than me who’ve thought them up. But none of that matters if we’re still trying to get the ruling class to grow a heart in order to make it happen.
You're in the right place. We're working towards a similar goal.
Let's talk.
J.
Perfect 👌