An Integral School of Economics

In my first post on Integral Economics, I looked at what a coherent Integral Economic theory should include and how such a theory could usefully describe the economic motivators and systems for societies and communities at each stage/wave of development. In this post I want to focus on the Economics of the Integral Wave itself and explore what we might expect from an Integral School of Economics.

I’ve previously called the economics of the Yellow/Teal wave “Wisdom Economics” and I think this is a fitting title. Recapping my description of Wisdom Economics in that post;

“In the Life Conditions of Yellow, multiple perspectives and realities can be held simultaneously. The greatest good, becomes a conditional. One size does not fit all. Solutions to problems must be flexible and organic, natural and functionally fit for the vMeme in question. Wealth in knowledge and wisdom become priorities over material possessions. The Economics of Yellow are driven by functional fit. Integrated meshworks of diverse and varied economic modalities coexist in a Panarchic Integral Agora where order tetra-arises out of the chaos of billions of daily economic transactions of all types along all quadrants, and all lines.”

So OK, what does this mean in practice? What it means is that for the first time, at Integral, one is capable of discerning the different value systems that drive economics at each stage/wave and both the positive and negative externalities each of those values entail. In our modern world the economy is primarily driven by ORANGE (Modern) and GREEN (Postmodern) economic value systems. But all value systems come into play and have an impact on our lives. Comprehending that –why that is and what factors point to it and what it means for society as a whole — is important for an Integral Understanding of the current state of the economy.

More importantly, however, an Integral understanding of economics is a powerful tool we can use to predict what future economies might look like, how they might function, and how they might transform our lives and the environment as a whole. Key to that understanding is the AQAL model of economics I presented in my previous essay. While most first tier economic schools of thought capture one, or at most two, quadrants of the Economic line of AQAL, there is currently no mainstream economic theory that integrates all four quadrants. And that is exactly what will be necessary in order to develop a 2nd tier Economic School.

1. Upper Left, Individual Interior = “What I Will.” Praxeological Economic philosophy, and Behavioral Economics. Economic Psychology.
2. Upper Right, Individual Exterior = “What I do.” Praxeological Economic Philosophy and Behavioral Economics. Orthodox and Heterodox theories of Microeconomics.
3. Lower Left, Collective Interior = “What ought to be.” Normative Economic philosophy. Marxist, Socialist, Anarchist, Feminist, and many other Economic philosophies.
4. Lower Right, Collective Exterior = “What is.” Positive Economic philosophy. Neoclassical and Orthodox theories of Macroeconomics

Over the course of the Modern and Postmodern ages various schools of Economic thought have ascended and diminished in popularity among scholars. Invariably these schools of economics all fall victim to the limitations of their own vMeme lens. Though they may try, and occasionally get close, by synthesizing two or more Quadrants of our “Economic AQAL” what they ultimately miss is the developmental part of the equation. They describe their own layer of the developmental onion, and miss all the other layers, beneath and above them, that are acting in their economies. Thus their theories don’t quite ever pan out in reality.

No matter what “School” of economics one studies, it is almost certain to make assumptions about a given economy based upon the worldview lens of the economists from which the theory is derived. Therefore it is no wonder that economic theory changes with the same rapidity and variety as any of the social sciences and humanities. At the same time economics does tend to follow certain patterns of statistical predictability in-so-far as the economic theory being tested matches the social vMeme of the economy in question. This aspect of economics can encourage the “orthodox” or mainstream economists toward an overly materialist or positivist approach to economics, and away from the equally valid and useful philosophical approaches.

When we think of economics, we commonly think of it in modern terms as the exchange of goods and services, or in some cases even just monetary exchange. However historically, and especially in a integral developmental context, economics is the study of ALL human exchange. Exchange of material goods and services certainly, but also the exchange of social relationships, of reputation, of loyalty and rank, the exchange of data, knowledge, and information, of wisdom, of emotional energy, of spiritual vibration and so on. Such modes of exchange are more or less visible or understood at different levels of consciousness development, but they are all there. Each level of development, each vMeme has different – in some cases radically different – relationships with these various modes of exchange.

The key insights that an integral approach to economics can provide are in understanding the main economic motivators of each stage/wave, and therefore understanding the types of exchanges that each stage/wave favors. The ability to understand that while for the ORANGE stage the production and accumulation of income producing Capital Assets is a major motivator, for GREEN it is the equitable use and division of those assets and the income they produce that is the primary economic motivator. Both are concerned primarily with Material Exchange, but in very different ways. For the Integral, YELLOW/Teal wave, concerns about material exchange are less of a motivator than the exchange of Information, Knowledge and Wisdom which are the primary economic motivators of Integral consciousness. Developmentally if we ask the question: What is real wealth? We might see something like this:

Developmental Economic Motivators

Stage/Wave	What is Wealth?	Motivator
Beige (Archaic)	Abundance of Food, Warmth and Shelter	Survival
Violet (Tribal)	Abundance of Acceptance, Inclusion	Belonging
Red (Mythic)	Great Renown, Reputation, Influence	Power
Blue/Amber (Traditional)	High Social Rank or Position	Rank
Orange (Modern)	Abundance of Assets, Better Technology	Material
Green (Postmodern)	Equitable Distribution of Material Wealth	Fairness
Yellow/Teal (Integral)	Abundance of Knowledge and Information	Integration
Turquoise (Experiential)	Abundance of Experience, Relationships	Agape
Coral/Indigo (Unitive)	Abundance of Wisdom	Oneness

It is important to remember also that we all include within our economic lives most of these concepts and motivators. For example, no matter how developed our consciousness may be we still need food, warmth and shelter, still crave acceptance and inclusion, still value reputation and influence, still seek rank and position in our fields, still require material wealth to provide for our lifestyles. These needs are all holarchically nested, but as our developmental center of gravity shifts up the spiral the needs which we prioritize (and in the we-space the needs our cultures and societies prioritize) shifts.

How is this useful? Well for one thing it explains a whole lot about the economic territory as to why certain individuals, cultures and societies manifest certain economic outcomes. For example if an individual or cultural/social group is at COG Red/Amber; their economic priorities are going to be toward achieving renown, reputation, influence, rank or position within their respective social unit, and will have very little if any priority for gaining lasting Material Wealth (except as a signal of the former priorities). Better to have flashy cars and fancy clothes (in the case of Red), than to accumulate appreciating assets that will provide a healthy ROI. Better to be of good social stock, of a good family, of the right race or class/caste or nation of people (Blue/Amber), than to worry about equity or fairness.

Not until Orange COG comes on line do we see Material Wealth; specifically the accumulation and abundance of assets that themselves can be used to produce material wealth, as being the primary economic motivator. That primary motivator creates the striving for productivity, efficiency and industry that typify the modern age. Indeed the entire study of Economics as its own subject came about fundamentally from the modern desire to maximize productivity, efficiency and industry! Is it no wonder that most economic thought is based in Modern Orange COG terms?

And how beautiful that it is so! Because the truth of the mater is that the higher stages/waves of development rely heavily upon the foundation of material super-abundance generated by the Modern stage – without which Green would have no wealth to distribute equitably, Yellow/Teal would not have the freedom to study, accumulate, integrate and disseminate all the many forms of kosmic knowledge, and so on up the spiral. The Kosmos could not possibly support the weight of 10 billion Unitive consciousnesses, without the maximal technological and material super-abundance that Orange consciousness can bring to the economic table. Orange, therefore is a sort of fulcrum point in Integral Economics, allowing us to leverage the satisfaction of both our premodern physical and social needs and priorities as well as our post modern existential and metaphysical needs and priorities.

In conclusion, an Integral School of Economics is one which integrates the praxeological I/It quadrants, and the normative and positive We/It’s quadrants, along with the developmental priorities/motivators of each stage/wave to come to a fuller understanding of the economic landscape of the kosmos. Such a school of economic thought and philosophy could have tremendous explanatory and predictive power in today’s society. By providing the tools to understand the developmental, social, cultural, and psychological patterns that motivate economic actors and agents, Integral Economics provides insights that could transcend and include the various, often seemingly irreconcilable, economic philosophies, from Marx to Mises and everything in between, into an Integrated Whole. Such an Economic school would fit well within the Integral Panarchic society I have envisioned in past essays. Indeed the establishment of such an Integral School of Economics would do much to pave the way for the evolution of such a future society. I only hope to see it happen in my lifetime!

Why I was wrong about election 2020.

In 2020 I made a bet on Twitter with Robb Smith and Mark Forman that Trump would win the election. I thought it wouldn’t even be close. I was sure of it. I am usually very very good at predicting these things. I knew Bill Clinton was going to win (both times – he was the first presidential candidate I ever saw in person), Bush II as well, And Obama (twice, that was an easy call). And I predicted Trump in 2016. In fact I haven’t been wrong once since I started really paying attention to national politics in high school. Presidential elections have never surprised me. Ever.

This one did.

So the terms of our bet were that the loser write a piece about why they were wrong. The problem is; I still don’t know. And I think a lot of people don’t know either. At the end of the day, Trump as a president, was in my opinion, about as good as one could expect policy wise, while being pretty horrible in every aesthetic way imaginable. I acknowledge his faults freely. His boorishness and narcissism and all that. But I do think he had good intentions. I think he believed in “Making America Great Again,” from his level (Traditionalist/Modernist), and I think we needed a bit of tempering of the excesses of Postmodernism from the Obama era.

Whether I am wrong or right about any of that, one thing is made perfectly clear about how politics work in America. There is an Establishment, and if you are not a part of it (and Trump was not) all manner of barriers will be put in your way. All one needs to do is look at the Media’s treatment of Biden, vs. Trump to get an understanding of how this plays out.

Some things, for the record, about the election I still can’t quite get my head wrapped around:

1. Somehow, despite the worst showing by minorities since JFK, Joe Biden managed to get 10 million MORE votes than Obama’s record breaking turnout. (and meanwhile Trump got more minority votes than any republican in recent history). Somehow a gaff-ridden geriatric career politician managed to drum up a record setting 80 million votes while consistently trailing Trump in every measure of voter enthusiasm.
2. Somehow 19 of the 20 “Bellweather” counties also got it wrong, just like me… All 20 had previously accurately predicted the outcome of the presidential election since 1980. Yet in 2020 19 out of the 20 got it wrong.
3. Despite Biden’s record smashing vote count, his down ballot Dems didn’t do nearly as well. The House lost seats in 2020 to republicans. People who came out to vote for Biden, apparently either voted for republican house candidates or didn’t cast any down ballot votes at all… how odd.
4. Historically, every incumbent who wins 75% of the total primary vote wins the election. Let me repeat that. EVERY time since primaries began in 1912, no incumbent with more that 75% of the total primary vote has lost re-election. Trump won 94% of the primary vote, more than Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. Only 5 other incumbent candidates have had greater than 90%. But amazingly that more than century long trend was shattered in 2020 by Joe Biden.

So my hat goes off to Joe Biden for an Historical and statistically impossible win! Congratulations. I’m sure it’s completely deserved…

Now that may sound like sour grapes. But in all truth, the only reason I rooted for Donald Trump at all is because he challenged the Establishment. ANY candidate that challenges the establishment in general, I will root for. Actually I would have much preferred to see Tulsi Gabbard, or Andrew Yang in the oval office. But it seems to me that the Dems are far more captured by the Establishment currently than the GOP. That has not been the case historically but it certainly is now.

As for myself, I have backed away from social media. I rarely check twitter or facebook in the last couple months. My position on national elections has reverted to my former position, until another anti-establishment rabble rouser comes along to upset the political apple cart in Mordor-on-the-Potomac.

Developing Toward Panarchy and Beyond; Functional Fit

In addition to the criticism that Panarchy is too unbalanced, a second criticism I sometimes hear is that Panarchy cannot properly handle pressure from social holons of lower altitude. Put another way, an Integral Panarchic Operating system cannot defend itself from the emergence of say, a Red Warlord, or Blue (Amber) expansionist state. I believe this erroneous belief stems from two sources. Firstly, my own reluctance or inability to predict exactly how an Integral Panarchy would actually deal with such scenarios. I have some ideas, but I am also careful not to put them out as “the way” such that readers get the impression that Panarchy can only have a certain method for dealing with such challenges, leading to critics of panarchy focusing on those potential methods, rather than the social organizational principles themselves. The second source is, I believe, the reluctance or inability of the critics themselves to use their own imaginations!

The crux of this critique, that Panarchy fails should there exist within it social holons (no matter their number) at conventional or pre-conventional stages is interesting to look at. It begs the question, how does panarchy handle the emergence of a pathological lower stage vMeme on the one hand, and more importantly what global social developmental conditions (or in Spiral Dynamics terms “Life Conditions”) are necessary in order for Panarchy to emerge in the first place? It is the second question that should be answered first. For it is Life Conditions that will eventually necessitate the emergence of Panarchy as a social operating system. Once that occurs, then it is appropriate to wonder, what happens when Panarchy is challenged by lower level elements from within. After all, Panarchy doesn’t require all people to be at a certain developmental level. It requires the leading edge (and dominant LR/LL vMeme to be at 2nd Tier as a minimum and for the bulk (the center of the bell curve if you will) to be at Orange. At present we are not quite at that stage yet, but we are not all that far off either.

A bell curve is an important concept because as our collective consciousness evolves, that distribution curve moves collectively “up” the spiral. So that the preconventional vMeme’s become more and more rare (that’s important because Panarchy isn’t suitable if a large portion of humanity is still preconventional – this is also why early 20th century attempts at anarchy failed). Already the center of our bell curve is at say red/BLUE with the lead or dominant vMeme at orange/Green, so Beige (or infrared, or crimson or whatever the fuck they’re calling it now) is pretty rare in society – perhaps the mentally ill and/or homeless are the closest equivalent we have today. Purple (Magenta) are more common but by no means representative of human social holons as it had been in the recent past. Red is also probably on the back side of the apex of the curve, while Blue (Amber) forms the vast bulk of current social holons.

It might help us to look at the various Social Operating systems from the standpoint of functional fit. Integralists are generally familiar with the AQAL 4 quadrant model (see figure above via Robb Smith). This is a useful way at looking at the whole picture of Kosmic development. Note particularly the lower left quadrant (Exterior-Collective). What I’d like to do in the next few paragraphs is plot the memetic distribution of the population which are necessary to generate the functional fit of the associated level-appropriate operating system.

Nation State | Democracy

The flowering of Democratic Republics in the Americas and Europe from the late 18th through the 19th centuries was not by accident. The Democratic Nation State is the natural, functionally fit operating system for a social holon with a developmental distribution similar to the above graphic. Once the leading edge of the society, those who determine the direction of the culture (art, music, philosophy and so on) is firmly rooted in the Modern (Orange) vMeme the power dynamics shift away from Blue/Amber Empire|Monarchy as the functionally fit Operating System. This shift is inevitable. Of course there will be some variation in the precise makeup or Aesthetics of the Operating System. Never-the-less the general form will be of a Nation State|Democracy.

World State | Network

Beginning in the Progressive era following WWI and WWII we had first the failed “League of Nations,” and finally the United Nations which formed at the conclusion of World War II. The formation of these Global Networks of Nations have fostered a level of peace on earth that has not been previously seen in Human history. Yes, there are still wars fought among the nation states of the world (often these are proxy wars over ideology and access to resources), but it is no longer so easy for one belligerent nation state to drive the whole world into all-out total war. There is an overall “World State” in the United Nations that keeps such belligerents in check.

The Life Conditions necessitating this change where, perhaps most chillingly, the probability of extinction due to Global Thermonuclear War. But another precondition, namely the progressiveness of the global population was also beginning to come on line. The world was becoming smaller, and more and more people’s consciousness was shifting from a Conventional ethnocentric perspective to a Modern universal and Postmodern multicultural perspective. More and more people began to think of themselves as “global citizens” rather than national citizens, and when that happens the need for a more global social operating system becomes critical.

Trans State | Panarchy

This is the point in history where we stop looking back and begin to look forward. As such it is somewhat in the realm of speculation. However, we are beginning to get more and more clues about the next up and coming Operating System for human society. I’ve been writing about this up and coming system since 2012, and I have so far seen nothing that convinces me that it will take a substantially different form; in fact quite the opposite, the developments of the last decade have only further convinced me of the inevitability of this LR quadrant shift within our lifetimes.

In fact Panarchic organizational methodologies are already beginning to be practiced. I can think of no better example of this right now than in what has become known as “Teal Organizations,” which in operation are very similar to how I envision a Panarchy to operate as a Global Social Operating system. The life conditions that will necessitate this shift will be more and more of the global population shifting out of Conventional and Preconventional consciousness (again that shift in the bell curve), so that the bulk of humanity is thinking much more globally, and so that the leading edge (that 15%) of the curve is solidly second tier. The post-conventional consciousness, being far more capable and autonomous than previous stages, will demand an operating system that allows for more autonomy, more diversity, more choice and experimentation while still having some guardrails for developing holons. That function is best served by Panarchy.

Non State | Agora

Now let’s get really speculative! In my view the next step beyond Panarchy would be, well Anarchy! I know however that’s a pretty big leap for some. I prefer the term “Agora” as it has far fewer negative connotations. Agora is ancient Greek for “gathering place” or “assembly” and can be thought of as representing a “collaborative commons” so to speak, or essentially – a place we all come together in voluntary cooperation.

The life conditions at this stage would be the vast bulk of humanity in the postconventional and Integral stages of consciousness, as well as an economic and material “superabundance” created by the prior panarchic society and integral technologies available. At this stage scarcity is no longer the driving economic factor in society, and as such the need to regulate the material economy becomes more and more moot. The transition from Panarchy to Agora is likely to be a gradual one (as there is nothing in Panarchy per se that prevents Agora from arising). Thus unlike the transition from First Tier World State to 2nd Tier Panarchy, there is unlikely to be any social drama or unrest associated with this shift in paradigm.

Personally, I think we’ll see Panarchy (or something similar) in the 21st century gradually moving toward a voluntarist agora as we approach the 22nd century and beyond. But even if we don’t achieve things that rapidly, it is my view that this is an inevitable progression on the kosmic timescale. The question isn’t really will we progress to these new social paradigms, but when will we.

How does Panarchy handle Conventional and Pre-conventional challengers?

I think one mistake that critics of Panarchy/Anarchy often make is looking at it’s functional fitness in terms of the Life Conditions we have today. There may be many people who wish to live a more free life in an anarchistic or more libertarian society (myself included!). Such a society is certainly possible to imagine in the context of current life conditions. However, such a society is none-the-less unlikely to be stable enough to remain pure to it’s original intentions unless the Life Conditions on Earth as a whole are sufficiently advanced to warrant it. Rather it would find itself eventually overrun either internally or externally by the demands and needs of lower level holons. The result, unfortunately, would be the regression to a more functionally fit operating system in keeping with the memetic makeup of the population. Only very strict controls on the memetic makeup of the societies population would prevent such a regression from “the inside” but still, it would not prevent it from the outside.

Thus it is important to recognize that Panarchy will come to fruition only when Life Conditions are appropriate for it to do so, and not before. Similarly with the more advanced “anarchic” operating system I call Agora. Such an Operating System will require an advanced society indeed. It is therefore a category error of sorts to reference past attempts at anarchy such as those of the late 19th and early 20th centuries as analogous to what I am discussing here. Doing so would be like comparing the Democracy of ancient Athens with that of the United States. While they may have some philosophical similarities, they are operating on entirely different developmental levels.

A Turquoise Agora would look nothing like a Green Anarchy, because the constituent holons as well as life conditions of the two would be so incredibly different. This is why forcing an early adoption of these operating systems is also not advisable. Once again, it will happen, when our Exterior Collective condition makes it functionally fit.

Given those pre-conditions one can see firstly how rare and powerless (in the sense of social power) conventional and preconventional vMeme’s would be in these future societies. It would be as if our current orange/GREEN society were to worry about being challenged by Beige or Purple vMemes. They will number so few and be so powerless even within their own cultures as to be relegated to cases of what we might consider mental illness worthy of social charity and care today. While you will undoubtedly indeed find examples of individuals unable to move beyond a Red center of gravity, and crime and violence will not wholly disappear, the danger of such people gaining control of or endangering society as a whole is simply too remote and in the long run, very highly unlikely to affect the overall trajectory of our development.

On the time scale of the Kosmos there is an evolutionary certainty that we will either advance, or we will destroy ourselves in the attempt. I prefer to remain optimistic.

Bottom Up, or Top Down? Finding Balance in an Integral Global Social Operating System

I sometimes hear from my Integral fellow travelers that Panarchy as a form of global governance can’t work because it is too “bottom up” and not “top down” enough. The argument being that there needs to be a balance between bottom up (coming from the individual and local level) political power, and top down (coming from the national and global level) political power. That a Second Tier political paradigm would need to maintain this balance in order to properly function as such. Indeed, do we not see in all holons that the “whole” manages, oversees, and controls the “parts” rather than the other way around? Words do not determine the meaning of sentences or paragraphs. Cells do not determine the functioning of organs. A single brushstroke doesn’t determine the beauty of a work of art. From an Integral frame the two work together. The parts cannot do it without the whole, and the whole of course needs the parts. It is a natural symbiosis.

If the Parts become too strong at the expense of the whole, the result is a “cancer” of the holon – the parts kill the whole. Conversely, if the whole becomes too strong at the expense of the parts, the result is a “suicidal psychosis” of the holon – the whole kills the parts. So balance is required, and Panarchy as I have outlined it, lacks that balance. It is too Anarchistic, too Libertarian.

Well guess what? I agree.

I agree that a balance of top down order vs. bottom up order is required at every stage of development. I agree that too much in one direction or another creates on the one hand holonic cancer, and on the other holonic psychosis. AND I agree that when I discuss Panarchy, as I often do, I approach it from an Anarchistic and Libertarian perspective that matches my own aesthetic and political preferences. After all, in my perfect world there would be no government at all, not even a panarchic one!

So the question remains; what is the proper balance in an Integral Global Society, and how could that balance be achieved?

To answer that question properly we have to look at the relative balance of power between wholes and parts within holons as we go up the spiral of development. Think about parts and wholes and whole-parts and wholes made up of whole-parts. If you do this mental exercise, what you’ll find is that because more developed and complex holons have greater depth, their constituent parts ALSO have greater depth, and are themselves very complex. The higher the level of the holon, the more this holds true. I noted this phenomenon briefly in my first essay on Panarchy when I said;

As the center of gravity of our (LL) cultural worldview shifted from pre-conventional (egocentric), to conventional (sociocentric), to post-conventional (world-centric), we can see that there was a corresponding paradigm shift in the organization of society. From pre-conventional Autocracy/Dictatorship, to conventional Aristocracy/Monarchy, to post-conventional Democracy/Constitutional Republic. As each progression transcended the one before it, political power was dispersed to a larger number of potential actors, from the single (dictator), to the few (aristocrats), to the many (representatives elected from the citizenry). We should therefore expect that these patterns will continue into the next paradigm shift for an integral (kosmoscentric) cultural worldview.

Note that generally speaking, in the Lower Right (Social/Political) quadrant, the higher the “level” of a holon’s social organization developmentally, the more autonomy and freedom are granted to the “parts” that comprise that holon. Why? because without that freedom the parts, which are themselves increasingly developed holons in their own rights, cannot function to their fullest potential. Every social community-holon seeks to find it’s own level of autonomy appropriate to it’s developmental center of gravity. Take Nepal for example. Nepal has tried to function under a post-conventional democracy for decades only to struggle with infighting and corruption, and is now looking at instituting constitutional monarchy (a conventional social operating system) which may in fact be more appropriate. Where-ever in the world one finds a failing democracy, the reason may in fact just be a mismatch of operating system and cultural development. Better a healthy conventional Monarchy, than an unhealthy corrupt Democracy when you have a culture that is not yet “post-conventional.”

…many parts of the United States might could take that advice…

Panarchy is an Integral Global Operating System built to provide a supporting latticework for the development and advancement of it’s constituent community-holons. It provides basic protections to individuals as well as mediation of disputes between its member communities – part of which may include a sort of Community Social Credit system, like a credit score, but for a whole community. Importantly the power to regulate, tax, and raise armies are absent, instead the Panarchy’s final recourse is simply expulsion and ostracism.

Such a Panarchic operating system would serve as an engine of cultural and social development. As people are freed to experiment and create communities to their liking – forming and dissolving them as needs evolve – the speed with which cultures and societies develop, and the variety of their manifestations will be something to behold. Imagine such a world. It is not a utopia. It is messy, and chaotic, and free, and beautiful, and diverse. I imagine such a world, and I see it’s alternative – The world we are currently hurtling toward. The world of Globalism and the Great Reset, of the United Nations, the WHO, and the World Bank. A world in constant fear of itself. It is a world out of balance. It is a world in Psychosis and headed for Suicide.

I know which world I will fight for…

Brodoland is Podcasting!

I’ve now dipped my toe into the pocasting world and I am loving it! Look for new episodes of my podcast, Integrate This!, every Weekend (usually dropping by 12am on Sunday).

Integrate This! is a podcast about politics, economics, current events, lifestyle and other commentary from a heterodox Integral perspective… Some things are better left said!

You can find new episodes here in the Integrate This! Podcast Page or by subscribing on your favorite podcasting platform, such as Apple Podcasts or Stitcher and many more. I hope you enjoy this new content as much as I love making it!

Confessions of an Integral Climate Change “Denier”

Part of coming up through the GREEN world-centric stage involves developing a deep concern for our planet. “That Pale Blue Dot” that Carl Sagan spoke so eloquently of is our spaceship earth, and without it our species could not survive. In fact as far as we know there is no other planet quite like it. When looked at from the vastness of space, our home looks tiny, fragile and insignificant. And from that perspective, billions of miles away, it is. Any number of cosmic disasters could end us in an instant. We have only the most tenuous grasp on survival, clinging to this precious blue gem in the empty, harsh vastness of the universe.

Thus from a GREEN lens, there is perhaps no greater priority than to protect our precious irreplaceable home. This is one of the fundamental and humbling truths that GREEN brings us. To be at “Integral” or higher altitude, means necessarily having integrated this important truth. Yet for many Integralists, including perhaps nearly all well known “Boulder” Integralists, “integrating” a deep concern for the health of the planet means buying wholesale into the MGM version of Climate Armageddon. No healthy skepticism allowed. This stance is not only NOT integral, it is not even GREEN. It is an AMBER(BLUE) all-or-nothing, appeal-to-authority, quasi-religious stance, that given the actual data, any true Integralist should be extremely wary of.

There are elements of truth in just about any narrative. Some facts about the Human impact on our environment are indisputable:

1. Human activity is releasing billions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere every year.
2. Atmospheric Carbon has increased from approximately 280ppm to 370ppm in the last 100 years.
3. The mean global temperature has increased by around 0.8 degrees C since 1880, and most of that change has occurred since the 1970’s.
4. The temperature of the oceans is also increasing by approximately 0.12 degrees C every decade for the last 50 years.
5. The Ocean is becoming more acidic due to Carbon Sequestration.

Those are the main indisputable facts on the ground. Most rational people (i.e. ORANGE COG and above), freely acknowledge these facts. Even many so-called “Deniers” (a term use by Climate Alarmists for Apocolyptic Climate Change skeptics that sounds a lot like “Heretic”) acknowledge the well documented human impact on the environment. The question, therefore is not what is happening, but rather what is the likely impact to the environment, and what, if anything, can and/or should be done?

The problem is that Climate Scientists use error prone computer models to predict what will happen in the future. These models have had a horrible track record over the years. A model is limited entirely by the programming and data fed into it. Trying to accurately model a chaotic system as complex as the Earth’s climate in a computer is bound to be fraught with error, and that has indeed been the case. Furthermore, because such models can be easily manipulated (whether consciously or unconsciously), one often need only look at how a study got funded in order to determine what the likely conclusion will be. As Upton Sinclair put it, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

That is a knife that can and does cut both ways. Academic Scientists, publishing in journals and seeking grant money are just as susceptible to confirmation bias as those scientists whose funding comes from the private sector. Especially given what is potentially at stake, Integralists should take any prognostications about climate with a grain of salt. To label such healthy skepticism “Denial” reeks of MGM absolutism.

Here are some additional facts that should be added to the ones above for some perspective:

1. CO2 is the primary building block of life on earth. Plants need it in the atmosphere at sufficient levels in order to thrive. Plant life dies at CO2 levels of 150ppm and lower. Plants evolved to thrive at an optimal level of 1200ppm of atmospheric CO2. That fact is well known by growers who regularly pump CO2 into their greenhouses to increase crop yields.
2. CO2 is the second most powerful gas in terms of its overall impact on the greenhouse effect, however the MOST powerful contributor is Water Vapor, which accounts for 95% of the greenhouse effect. CO2 only accounts for 3.6% of the effect.
3. Human Activity since the industrial revolution accounts for about 12 ppm or 3.2% of all the CO2 in the atmosphere. The rest of the rise in CO2, or about 69 ppm is naturally occurring CO2, mostly from plant and soil respiration and ocean off-gasing.
4. The overall impact on the Greenhouse Effect from human activity is 0.28% (or 5.53% if you ignore water vapor). The remainder of the effect is from natural causes.
5. The increase in atmospheric CO2 has caused a greening of the earth which is discernible from satellite data.
6. The other man made greenhouse gases (methane, nitrous oxide and CFC’s) are 50 times more powerful than CO2.

Some environmental organizations argue that water vapor should be ignored as it is the result of warming rather than the cause. However this same argument could be used for CO2. About half of the CO2 that goes into the atmosphere is offgased from warming oceans, and the evidence shows that CO2 rise since the last global minimum (a frightening almost extinction level of 180 ppm) lags behind global temperature rise by about 800 years. This indicates that natural CO2 rises as the result of rising temperatures and not the other way around.

All of this is not to say we should do nothing. However, it does bring into question the need for the massive, world disrupting, political solutions being put forth by Climate Alarmists. The politicians and their media machine are putting the world into a panic, and raising a generation of children who are in danger of falling into nihilistic despair because they literally believe they have only a few years left to live. Such hyperbole and apocalyptic rhetoric may serve the political class, but it has no backing in reality.

So what do I think we as Integralists should do to care for this planet?

1. We should take an integral approach to the data, and look for our own tendency for confirmation bias. Always remain skeptical, as any good scientist should be.
2. We should care for our communities and the land we are stewarding, looking to use less resources and provide more natural inputs to increase the health and fertility of the land.
3. We should work to eliminate sources of real pollution; including CFC’s, deforestation, factory farming, trash and landfills etc.
4. We should explore all avenues for the development of alternative energy sources. From solar and wind to nuclear power, which promises superabundant clean energy for millennia to come.
5. We should encourage the industrialization of poorer parts of the world, which will speed their development toward world-centric consciousness.
6. We should continue to study the effects of increasing CO2 levels, but also recognize the many potential benefits of higher CO2 concentrations including a greening of our planet and more abundant food sources for the global population.

Living in the Present Moment

These days I post mostly about politics, but in my offline life my interests are closer to earth. In 2011 I prepared with my family to move to rural Japan to live closer to the land. I was inspired by people like Masanobu Fukuoka and John Seymour, my lifestyle heroes to this day. We lived there only three years. Much of the first year or so of this blog centers around the beginning of that journey.

There are many reasons why we came back to the US, some deeply personal, and some just pragmatic. It is unlikely that we’ll go back to Japan permanently, but I do still dream of a small holding; an off-the-grid home or small zen hermitage on something like 5 to 20 acres of good land. I don’t want to be a “professional” farmer, I don’t want to bring my crops to market or create a CSA (although I certainly applaud those who do so). I just want to work with the land, increase it’s fertility, and leave my spot on earth more abundant than I found it. I believe such a labor of love to be a deeply spiritual endeavor.

Eventually, when the children are off on their own, I would like to fulfill this vision of a simple rustic life in connection with the land and with daily zazen practice. Meditation and the Zen tradition have become a very important part of my life in the last year. Someday I would like to transition to a monastic life, on a plot of land, devoting loving-kindness to the land and whatever small sangha might share this calling. I see stewardship of the land as a spiritual calling–a worship of the Kosmos by caring for and nurturing a small earthly slice. I imagine if millions of others worshiped in that way, what a gloriously fertile and healthy planet we would pass on to our children.

Currently we live in a suburb of Portland, Oregon. We have a very small house, a 1930 cape cod, 2 bedrooms. We heat it with a high efficiency wood stove, which we use sparingly about 3 months out of the year. We have no air conditioning. Our home sits on a 1/3 acre corner lot. Slowly we are turning this into a food forest using permaculture principles. In my mind, I tell myself this is to be my practice ground. However, It is possible I will never move again. So I practice as if I will live here forever.

At least once a day I sit in silent meditation. However I have found that meditation while working in the garden is also very nice. In stead of focusing on the breath, I focus on other things. “One scoop of mulch, two scoops, three… twelve make a full wheel barrow.” It is winter, the time for mulching, pruning, and preparing the garden for spring. A few Swiss Chard plants still remain, defying the frosts. Although my work keeps me from home 10 hours a day, five days a week, and raising three teenagers feels like a second full time occupation (the best, most rewarding occupation possible), the moments that I steal to practice in this way has made a huge difference in my life.

While in meditation, it is inevitable that the mind will wander. Often I find my mind wandering back to Haraikawa, and the time my family spent there. I imagine what it might look like now, if only we had stayed there. Then I catch myself and bring myself back to the present. Attachment to the past or to the future is the root of suffering, the source of anxiety, regret, worry, and depression. I focus on the present again with full attention. A soccer game, a cheer performance, a conversation over a cup of tea. One scoop of mulch, then two… Twelve make a full wheel barrow.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

On Racism and What it Actually is.

In the current postmodern cultural zeitgeist, few people are interested in what I, a middle aged heterosexual white male, has to say about the topic of racism. If that’s you, I understand. This blog post is not for you. This is for me, and for those who know me, either personally or through my online writing. It is to offer my honest, and deeply considered opinion on this complex topic to those with whom I have long been friends, but with whom I have never had this conversation.  This will be a long read, but if you are one of the small handful of people on this earth who actually care about my opinion on this please read carefully.

I am writing this following a weekend twitter exchange with a very good friend of mine. I consider this person to be one of my all-time closest friends. I consider him a brother. I love him as a brother. We’ve been friends since the 9th grade. I can count maybe one or two other friends in my entire life who are as important to me as him. We disagree on many things, especially politics, but that has never, and I hope will never, affect our friendship. It always makes for extremely lively, challenging  and enjoyable debates. He also happens to be a black man.

Here’s is the video he linked. Quite funny actually. Very Postmodern.

And here is the thing. He’s absolutely right. Racism is terrible, and has done terrible things to the world. Europeans colonized the world, and that had some terrible consequences for the native people of those places, consequences and legacies we still see today. All of that is given. All of that is true. But it is all partial. It’s a piece of the truth. It’s not a full picture. Furthermore, if one approaches the world as if that is the full truth and there is nothing more to be integrated, then you are perpetuating the very racism you are fighting against. 

Yeah, you heard me right. If your worldview is the currently (in the US and Europe anyway) fashionable Post-Modern worldview, then while you may think you are on the front lines fighting racism, you’re actually perpetuating it. You’re keeping it alive. You’re prolonging its legacy.

Understanding Worldviews and Value Memes is CRITICAL to understanding racism.

In my writing I talk a lot about Worldviews. One’s worldview is determined by one’s dominant Value Meme. Think of a Value Meme (or vMeme) as somewhat like software, like an operating system for your consciousness, and worldview is the User Interface. Developmental Psychologists have been mapping these vMeme operating systems for the last 50 years or more. Piaget, Graves, Loevinger, Gebser, Kohlberg, Fowler; the maps vary slightly in subject matter, focusing on the development of ego, morality, faith, or consciousness, but they all have in common a developmental progression. In other words, we start with simple, foundational operating software; seek food, seek shelter, create offspring.  Human 1.0 software is very much like any other animal. Then comes Human 1.1; tribal human, then Human 1.2; egoistic human, then Human 1.3; traditional human, then Human 1.4; modern human, and then Human 1.5; post-modern human. In the last 30 years, we’ve seen the gradual emergence of Human 2.0; integral human. However, human 2.0 is still somewhat rare; perhaps 2-3% of the population and growing.

All humans must update their software sequentially as they grow and develop into adults. Generally these updates continue until a mature adult human has uploaded the most current software version his or her social group is utilizing. Every so often, a maverick human will test out a “newer” update. Sometimes they like the demo and implement the update fully. This is how progress is made.

Often, prior versions of the software become corrupted. They get viruses, and at times large chunks of data go missing. At those times it is important for humans to “reinstall” the prior versions of the software. When doing this humans use terms like, “working on one’s shadow,” “Connecting with one’s inner child,” or “going through a midlife crisis.” However, until they actually install human 2.0, they are still limited to the User Interface of their current version of the software.

If we understand the version of the software a person is using we can understand their approach to the world around them. The tools to do this, to take on the perspective of other worldviews, are uploaded with the Human 1.5 update. However, although the tools are there, the UI is  somewhat clunky and underdeveloped. It’s important to remember that prior to 2.0, humans are incapable of looking objectively at other worldviews, that capability, is fully online with update 2.0. The primary feature of the 2.0 update is the ability to revert to prior UI’s as the need arises.

Following the software analogy so far? 🙂

The point of explaining all of this is to understand that humans are not all functioning from the same worldview, and furthermore, all worldviews hold a piece of the truth. Since human 1.0-1.5 operating systems are incapable of fully accessing other worldviews, they find themselves in constant conflict with each other. Each is holding on to the piece of the truth that their worldview can see, while trying to force it down the throats of others who cannot see it. This is the frustration my good friend feels when he says, “People don’t even know what racism is… More than that, though, I don’t think that people really WANT to know what it ACTUALLY is, and what its actually done to the world.”

His frustration is that not all people can see that piece of the truth that those at human 1.5 can see. His UI is showing him the obvious truths of racism that become glaringly apparent with the 1.5 update; the history of oppression imposed by white skinned peoples against brown skinned peoples all over the world; the systemic consequences of that oppression that carry on today; the continuing struggle and work needed to overcome those consequences. It is a powerful worldview, and it is dominant in our culture today. It is the worldview that brought us civil rights, and undid the systemic inequalities built into our legal systems and our social systems, not only in areas of race, but sex, sexual orientation and more. Human 1.5 took the enlightenment tools first introduced in the 1.4 update, and for the first time, applied them broadly to those people who were previously denied access to them.

If we can collect and integrate all the pieces of the truth, we can move beyond racism. We cannot end it. But we can move beyond it.

Generally speaking, as we update our software, our UI allows us to include a larger and larger group into the family we think of as “human” as “us” and as worthy of dignity, respect, empathy, and consideration.

At Human 1.0 that consideration goes as far as ourselves and immediate kin. It allowed cooperative hunting and gathering.

At Human 1.1 the consideration expands to our “tribe” or clan – an extended kin group. This level of consideration allowed specialization, farming and animal domestication.

At human 1.2 it expands further to incorporate related or allied tribes with common interests, goals etc. This level of consideration allowed political/religious organization, empire building and conquering.

At human 1.3 it expands further to incorporate all of “my people” defined by nationality, or by religion, or by ethnicity. This level of consideration allowed for nationalism, colonization and religious expansionism.

At human 1.4 it expands even further to incorporate all people. This is the first operating system to consider all people to be equal, and worthy of equal consideration. It allowed for the enlightenment, science, free exchange/speech/religion etc.

At human 1.5 it expands to an even further degree to include all sentient beings. This operating system prioritizes consideration for peoples/groups that historically suffered at the hands of those using prior operating systems. It allows for healing, diversity, universal empathy, and consensus making.

At human 2.0 the prior spheres of consideration are understood to be holarchically arranged, each becomes fully integrated. This operating system stabilizes the prior operating systems into a functional and harmonious whole. It tempers the excesses of prior systems and allows for a truly integrated panarchic global society.

Racism can thus be properly seen in this context as the difference between the considered in-group of one operating system from another. Human 1.5 sees Human 1.4 as racist because they do not prioritize consideration to those who’ve historically suffered. Human 1.4 sees Human 1.5 as racist (or “reverse racist”) because they prioritize consideration of some over others, thus creating inequalities in consideration. Meanwhile both Human 1.5 and 1.4 see Human 1.3 as racist because their consideration extends only to their nation, ethnicity or religious creed.

Because the Human 1.5 operating system is currently so dominant, Human 2.0 is often focused on tempering the excesses of Human 1.5. Thus Human 1.5 often interprets Human 2.0 as racist in the same way that Human 1.4 is racist because they interpret this tempering or balancing action as an attack on the 1.5 value Meme. This could not be further from the truth. Human 2.0 has integrated 1.5 and is attempting to stabilize it into a functional holarchical balance with the other vMemes.

Sometimes this is more skillfully accomplished than others. Coleman Hughes is hugely skillful in this regard. His contributions at Quillete are must-reads. It is an understandable and perhaps unavoidable circumstance that pale skinned persons must rely on their melanin endowed fellows to be the voice of Human 2.0 with regard to the topic of race. I had accepted that and until recently remained fairly silent on the topic. It is expected by Human 1.5 that I withhold my opinion, that I self-sensor, on the basis of my whiteness. In fact to act as though I could not possibly have any opinion of any value at all on racism by virtue of that whiteness. That is the absolutely silly excess to which Human 1.5 is currently being driven, and against which I can no longer just be silent.

 

Health and Pathology; Agency and Communion

In thinking about Integral Politics we must not let our own biases confuse us into mistaking the axis of Health and Pathology, for the axis of Agency and Communion. All too often in political debates I see people (some, not all) usually with either a strong bias toward agency or communion either ascribe pathology to the other, or claim the other to be coming from a lower holarchical worldview. And while it is possible either might be the case, I think that often it is not, and what you have are two genuine people, who both want the best for humanity, simply unable to inhabit the other’s native bias.

As Integralists, we should seek a social/political paradigm that fully honors both Agency and Communion. However we should seek to also eliminate social pathology and encourage social health. But to do that, first we must determine what is the root of Social Pathology? When I began to ask myself that question many years ago, I had a very strong sense of “right” and “wrong,” as most of us do (especially at the First Tier stages). Different stages see right and wrong in different terms, and these terms build upon each other holarchically:

At integral we see that different societies are really just social networks. We identify ourselves as members of these various networks, and our agreements on what is right and wrong are largely shaped by the stage out of which those networks primarily operate. Integral’s goal, our prime directive, is to create a healthy Meshwork (a network of networks) out of these various, often competing and at times opposing networks, so that they can coexist in their healthiest forms.

So how exactly do we determine healthy and what is unhealthy? I would propose axiomatically for Integral that what is Healthy is that which is Fair and Equitable, Rational, Follows our Rules, Strengthens us, Helps our Tribe, and Helps our Survival. Unhealthy is that which is unfair and inequitable, Irrational, breaks our rules, weakens us, and hurts our tribe and our survival. But here is the problem; we often don’t agree on what IS fair or unfair, rational or irrational! Our rules may be different than your rules, and what strengthens me might weaken you, what helps me and my tribe might hurt you and yours. So “healthy” MUST mean Universally “right” for the entire Kosmic Meshwork.  It cannot mean “right according to some and not to others.”

This is why I believe so strongly, that authoritarianism, in all its forms, is the root of Pathology. Authoritarian systems, at every level, are by definition “right according to some and not to others” (otherwise there would be no need for the authoritarian system in the first place). The Health of the Spiral is directly linked to the abolition of authoritarian social paradigms–not the abolition of authority mind you–but the abolition of involuntary systems of authority to which individuals and communities are bound without regard for what is “right” or “wrong” for them. As Integralists we should encourage and advocate for the growth of non-authoritarian systems of social organization, organized into an overall global “panarchic” meshwork.

Such a system is not yet Anarchic (which comes later at higher levels of development), but it is the first step in the major paradigm shift which must occur to reach a healthy Intregral Social Center of Gravity.  My fear of course is that it could just go the other way, and we’ll be trapped in a Pathological Authoritarian “Integral” – one that uses Integral methodologies to control and manipulate a global authoritarian government. In my view this is unfortunately a very likely scenario, unless Integralists do something about it.

Dystopia is on the march!

 

Panarchy; The Integral Global Operating System for the 21st Century

Robb Smith’s keynote address at the recent What NOW conference; Never Been Better, Never Felt Worse: Inside the Rise of an Integral Global Operating System for the 21st Century was a very good follow up to his Webinar (and essay) The Great Release, which I talked about in my last post. I recommend checking both of them out. I won’t touch on the latter part of his presentation regarding the rise of (BLUE/Amber) populism. My take on that is a bit different than his. But in his keynote he addressed the question of Integral Politics–the  manifestation of the YELLOW(Teal) Wave in the LR quadrant of the AQAL model. Those in the Integral Establishment do not often weigh in on the specifics of Integral Politics, but Robb seems to have much interest in the topic. However his presentation gave us a wide 100,000 foot orbital view and continued the Boulder tradition of remaining somewhat vague as to the details, perhaps so as not to make predictions or prognostications that turn out in the future to have been false.

Integral Politics (the LR quadrant of AQAL) and Panarchy as it’s most functionally fit operating system, has been the focus of my writing for the last 6 years. So I was frankly astonished, excited and gratified to see him recognize Panarchy in his presentation as the appropriate operating system for a society centered in the YELLOW(Teal) wave of development and I  agree with his assessment that we are seeing this transition toward more and more panarchic social infrastructures right now.

I think Robb and I agree that the transformation to a panarchic social operating paradigm will be driven by technology. As he put it in his presentation “Technology simply is the greatest driver of human evolution in all four quadrants that there is.” Integral technologies will undermine the hold of the old dominant paradigm, eroding its influence over the direction of society. I don’t think this will manifest as a knock-down drag-out fight of ideologies as has been the norm in 1st Tier. Rather I think it will come about organically, through the global spread of seemingly innocuous technology. States will be powerless to stop it, not even North Korea can stop it. and our global society will have to come up with an operating system that makes sense in a world where communication and information is free, instantaneous, and ubiquitous. To quote Robb:

As I argued in The Great Release, I believe that governance will need to significantly evolve to Teal, meta-systematic intelligence that includes whole systems thinking, polarities, and whole-part dynamics. In short, we’ll have to progress from network governance models to holarchical governance models such as panarchy.

In such a society, nations and borders can no longer represent fenced enclosures where citizen-livestock are kept and milked by a political/bureaucratic elite. New more efficient panarchic infrastructures will begin (are beginning) to serve the functions that were considered the sole monopoly of the Estates of the Realm. Our governments will increasingly find themselves in competition with non-estate entities for provision of more and more essential services, until they fall into obsolescence. From correspondence to currency and exchange, to mass-media and education, new technologies have eroded the primacy of First Tier estate systems in favor of new Second Tier panarchic systems. New technologies will continue to circumvent the need for “public” services as the services themselves are made unnecessary, or are provided for more efficiently through panarchic means.

Eventually, nations will come to represent cultural boundaries more than physical ones. As more and more people expand their uchi-soto boundaries to include global and kosmic centered concerns, panarchic systems work to systematically declaw the nation-state system and force it to take on the softer tone of a cultural identity project, much like Modernism’s effect on the power of religion. Thus, like one’s religion, one’s nation will continue on as a cultural unit, an identifier that ultimately will be adopted or discarded at the will of the individual.

That may sound like a future right out of a Neal Stephenson novel and our course may indeed take on some of those aspects. Evolution is a messy thing.  I gave another vision for what such a course might look like, but importantly, I acknowledge that I cannot see the form these transcendent technologies will take and therefore any vision I or anyone else casts is but wistful daydreaming of a future that is as impenetrable as it is inevitable. What is important to remember, and history bears this out, is as Robb put it, “that we bear in mind the long view of evolution, that we keep in our hearts the gratitude that life has never been better.” And I’d add they will continue to get better as our society evolves.

Gradually our society will wade into panarchic waters. Right now we’re only ankle deep, and already the impact on our daily lives has been huge. This is a time of tremendous change, and it will be difficult for many people to find a new balance. But this is the obligation of the leading edge. As Robb said, “This rebalancing must include preparing society for a Teal, post-dash world: post-energy, post-automation, post-work, post-money, post-singularity, post-truth, post-orthodox, post-AI, and perhaps most importantly, post-certainty.” This is our cross to bear, whether we’re “Integrally informed” or not. There are also many extraordinary voices out there doing good Integral level work that are driving society forward, yet who do not speak integralese–and that’s fine too. We need to add our voices to theirs, and work with them to foster this evolution in a healthy direction.