28 Comments
User's avatar
J. Thomas Dunn's avatar

💯

A new operating system is exactly what we need. And a new system that is actually capable of making change.

I'm in!

J.

Expand full comment
Erik Kvam's avatar

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.

Expand full comment
The Society of Problem Solvers's avatar

Small circles connected to make big circles - a team of teams - and we use digital systems to connect us. The hierarchy problem is solvable.

Expand full comment
Erik Kvam's avatar

Author Daniel Quinn called it “the new tribalism”

Expand full comment
Rickie Elizabeth's avatar

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.

Expand full comment
Brent Naseath's avatar

Here is a practical blueprint for a new operating system that would do just that. https://a.co/d/dAhH5NT

Expand full comment
J. Thomas Dunn's avatar

Thanks for the tip!

Expand full comment
SUE Speaks's avatar

The problem with books is that they are books. There's so much reading on Substack that that's a problem now. Can you do an elevator pitch?

Expand full comment
SUE Speaks's avatar

The problem with books is that they are books. There's so much reading on Substack that that's a problem now. Can you do an elevator pitch?

Expand full comment
J. Thomas Dunn's avatar

This isn't my post. I just commented on it

Expand full comment
Megan Mills Hoffman's avatar

Check out Rudolf Steiners Social Three-folding

..

Expand full comment
Megan Mills Hoffman's avatar

"It frees economic life from the bonds of the state"

Expand full comment
The Society of Problem Solvers's avatar

We don’t need to wait for anyone’s permission. Thanks for the suggested read! ❤️⚔️

Expand full comment
Empathic Philosophy's avatar

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.

Expand full comment
J. Thomas Dunn's avatar

Agreed

Expand full comment
Empathic Philosophy's avatar

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.

Expand full comment
J. Thomas Dunn's avatar

You're in the right place. We're working towards a similar goal.

Let's talk.

J.

Expand full comment
Empathic Philosophy's avatar

Perfect 👌

Expand full comment
SUE Speaks's avatar

Talk to me, too. See my post today. "Humanity needs to get itself moving": https://suzannetaylor.substack.com/p/humanity-needs-to-get-itself-moving

Expand full comment
Claudia's avatar

Sadly power hunger and greed do not find that attractive. How do we move towards this ideal you describe?

Expand full comment
J. Thomas Dunn's avatar

Connect with the people already building it

Expand full comment
SUE Speaks's avatar

This call isn't just coming from you, in that evolutionary way that new energies ripple out, and the call for a new operating system is on a lot of lips now. The virtue of the discord is that it has everyone thinking!

How about chicken and eggs? You're missing what would birth all those new ways, which would be people fired up with the privilege of being human. Check out what I just posted of my take on that: "Humanity needs to get itself moving" https://suzannetaylor.substack.com/p/humanity-needs-to-get-itself-moving

Expand full comment
Martin Anantharaman's avatar

Having read the constituent articles (and commented them) I suggest a radically different starting point: What is the kind of life that humans actually evolved for, by which I mean their genetic "base-functions" before culture built a monstrous catsle on that - what were the principles of society then (yes, there were very distinct ones - and they weren't many at all) as a "base-culture" - and how could one spin off a "sub-society" from today's sick world that enables us to got back to that base-culture.

Expand full comment
The Society of Problem Solvers's avatar

Small circles connected to big ones

Expand full comment
Rome Viharo's avatar

New OS is here. Symbiquity. All problems are solved when all sides win with this interface. Collective Intelligence and Game Theory here we are. Wanna try a demo? 😀 🙌🫶🏻

Expand full comment
Claudia's avatar

Could we also inspire what sadly I need to call boycotts. If we all withdrew our different retirement funds and either bought land or invested it in transparent funds for Good! We could also suggest people stop but Bill Gates products for instance.

Expand full comment