• Print

Systemic vs Moral Reform

By Marc Gauvin

"...We CANNOT reform user behaviour under a system without first removing the SYSTEMIC effect that produces that behaviour..."

Copyright © 07/2017/rev. 02/2020
Reproduction expressly granted provided attribution is given and original link is provided.

This short article is perhaps one of the most important I have ever written,  as it contains the proof of how almost all popularised dissent against the evil in society is erred and only serves to energise the very paradigm that produces said evil. 

The error is not understanding the critical difference between the
SYSTEMIC effect of a design governing behaviour within that design,  from the effects of user behaviour on the nature of that design.  

The game of musical chairs illustrates this perfectly as it is the design of the game that determines that a minimum of players will be left without chairs no matter how the players dance when the music is playing.  It is therefore absurd to expect to solve the problem of chair-less players by modifying how players dance (behave) without first changing the design of the game. 
We CANNOT reform user behaviour under a system without first removing the SYSTEMIC effect that produces that behaviour.

Similarly,  it is absurd to invoke individual human behaviour as the cause of the rich getting richer and the poor poorer without first addressing the systemic effect that makes such behaviour imperative within society.  What is that effect? 

We have formally proven that money's logical misrepresentation
necessarily produces the following SYSTEMIC effects:

  1. Stability of the value of asset holdings is systemically precluded.

  2. Asset value can only increase or decrease.

  3. The probability of decreasing asset value is systemically made greater than that of increasing it NO MATTER HOW RICH YOU ARE (inflation/deflation).

So, if we confuse the SYSTEMIC effect of logically misrepresenting money,  with the effects of the morality or lack thereof of people's behaviour under the yoke of said misrepresentation, we are doomed to greater divisiveness, alienation, animosity, belligerence, mistrust, condemnation without ever impacting the underlying source of the "immoral" behaviour. 

It therefore follows, that any explicit or implicit appeal to morality as the solution to the world's problems without first addressing the SYSTEMIC effect of money on everyone's behaviour (
rich and poor) is not only futile, but only further fuels the problem, as the futility of such pomposity squanders our collective resolve leading us all to greater and greater states of learned helplessness making us ever more impervious to true change.  Such guilt based approaches, ultimately serve to implicitly blame the victims of abuse by demanding moral infallibility while ignoring the root abuse of money's misrepresentation on everyone.

A practical illustration follows:

Consider a freezing room with a heat gradient of decreasing area over time.

Now, people are accustomed to signing money loan contracts using money as currently commonly misrepresented  as both a commodity and a measure of value without realising how such a notion is logically inconsistent for not noticing how those two notions are mutually exclusive. This common and unquestioned notion of money is also the key premise underlying the dynamic and unstable as opposed to Passive common money systemics. 

These contracts are enforceable by the full (physical) force of the law and determine people's current and indeed future position in the decreasing area of "warmth".  The dynamic nature of those contracts over time leaves all rich or poor no other alternative but to maximise returns unboundedly i.e. stability of the value of holdings is systemically precluded.  Thus, just to assure one's current position vis à vis the warmth gradient ALL require a correspondingly  unbounded "bigger the better" money/value returns.  One detail they have not understood,  is that the real cost of maintaining such a system, accelerates the rate at which the warmth area is decreased and precludes the cost in money terms of providing effecient heat to the whole room.  People have even come to believe that if everyone were warm no one would do anything worthwhile.

Now, in the midst of this terrifying dynamic, you have different categories of proposed reform.  One is to set up  areas in the room where people try to play out a Passive dynamic, but alas those areas being themselves passive cannot resist the insidious encroachment of the greater non passive dynamics all around them.  That is, while they illustrate what would work better for the whole system they are ineffective in countering the existing non passivity around them.  The next category are those that call to rearrange the position of people on the gradient assuming the circumstance of the decreasing warmth gradient is an immutable given,  but this just divides the population between those better postioned against those worse positioned,  the illusion that greater numbers will make a difference is countered by the reality that those with more heat are many times more able than those with less. 

Then,  in all this confusion, there is one group that points out that money is misrepresented and hence by standard legal principle must be corrected for money contracts to maintain their assumed status of validity.  This very correction precludes that money act as both a measure of value and a commodity removing the false premise underlying current non passive money.  Thus rendering, in one fell swoop, the whole system a Passive one.  They also point out the link between conventional money contracts and the decreasing heat gradient no matter where you are on that gradient and how correcting the misrepresentation does not require anyone giving up their current position on the gradient, while enabling all to optimise the best most comfortable positions on it. 

Finally, they show how there is and always has been sufficient heat for the whole room and how the gradient never was a physical constant.  But rather, it was the psychological product of the very imperatives of using a non passive money that made any resource seem scarce and decreasing in "availability" a notion easily confused with decreasing real physical supply.  Thus,  under money's misrepresentation no matter how much heat was produced the illusion of scarcity would persist and grow as long as contracts in terms of that misrepresentation continue to be accepted by rote.   This group proposes simply that money be, by legal imperative, logically and consistently defined and its current misrepresentation be corrected (i.e. scrapped), as that alone is the only thing that will change everything non belligerently on behalf of everyone no matter where one finds themselves on the illusory gradient.  In light of the real potential, that can accomodate everyone beyond what they could ever have imaged under the yoke of money's misrepresentation,  there is no rational argument not to make this objective the single most important strategic priority for anyone wishing to overcome the perils of living an illusory nightmare.  In short, "hell is being in heaven without realising it".




Break out of  "The Money PSYOP" and give your kids

a future they can be proud of you for by supporting the MSTA