Sunday, August 23, 2015

Rethinking Revolution: Disruption

Hi! Happy Sunday!

Today's post is about scratching that imagination itch.

Irreni World scale is first and foremost about solutions. Today's itch scratch is about the solution of innovation replacing revolution.

Innovation is a process disrupting existing market systems with better systems. The iPhone disrupted the cellular phone market. This process works in the free market because capitalism invites disruption of competition.

And governments? Do governments invite disruption of competition? No. Irreni World Scale can easily be seen as naive in that sense. The powers that be are not going to allow a competing government. Therefore replacing a government typically entails revolution, war and killing those who are in power at that time. Revolution burns the government to the ground and starts anew.

The US is too big to fail. We are the only world's "super-power" policing the oceans and lands. We manage the supply chains of food. We are the banking center. The US is just too big to fail for revolution. The 1% know this and are mocking us, laughing at us, Dick Cheney'ing us.

So what can we do then? Disruption.

Innovation is a benevolent form of disruption in that wars are not required and people don't have to be physically hurt. But there are two other kinds of disruption: disruption for disruption's sake and malevolent disruption. Revolution is a form of malevolent disruption. Think the French Revolution where the guillotine disrupted the heads of the 1% of their day. We could do the same today, chop off the heads of the 1%, but that would be 3 million of 300 million people. Do we really want to do that?

What can we do?

Innovation is benevolent disruption that needs some sunshine in order to grow. Corruption and the 1% have a stranglehold on government power today,  closing off the oxygen and sunlight required to innovate government.

So we make a few cracks of our own using disruption for disruption's sake.  Disruption for disruption's sake provides the same fertile opportunity soil that free markets provide competitive opportunity soil for innovation today. Once disruption for disruption's sake creates cracks in the corruption then the new ideas and the innovative ideas such as Irreni can have room to take hold.

How do we do this disruption for disruption's sake?

Easy, instead of saying "off with their heads" we say "off with their power heads".

The notion is simple. Fire and enforce a lifetime ban on every single person in a government or industry. Tell every single director on a US corporation board today that they are fired and can never, ever be a corporate board member ever again. One can imagine firing 100% of all Federal government employees and removing all of today's elected officials. No reason to physically chop people's heads off. Instead we cut off their  power head. We tell every person in financial industry, "You're fired!" And we follow it up with "You're fired permanently, you are forever banned from working in the financial industry ever again."

Crazy, eh? What we need is a little humility in this country. What we need is to put people on notice that no one is indispensable. We need to put these jackholes who justify their $400 million bonuses because they are irreplaceable, "no you are not". We can fire 100% of all US corporate boards and C level officers today and the world would never notice. Not a single fly would die as a result. These people are useless, the least useful people on the planet. Fire them all with impunity and sleep easy at night. 

In addtion it is time for the people who claim, "It is only  a few bad apples" to suffer the consequences of that attitude. That is not an acceptable excuse for the dot com bust, the real estate bust and the recession of 2008.

Meh, so this is just a thought experiment. This is just a thought experiment designed to get your creative political juices flowing about disruption. Think disruption.

What would disruption for disruption's sake really look like in practice? Well, we could demand as 300 million people a new constitutional amendment:

The Disruption Amendment:
1.) The American people have the sovereignty by a 50% majority ballot measure vote to disrupt any market or government, including and up to replacing 100% of the people in the Federal government and armed forces.
2.) Disruption may include removing up to 100% of people involved in the market and government over a period of one-to-ten years. 
3.) Disruption may include relocating offices and other gathering places so as to disrupt the surrounding culture. For example, moving Washington DC to somewhere more central, or even splitting up a central seat such as Washington DC into many federated locations.
4.) Disruption candidates must be selected by standards of participation that existed prior to the industry or market consideration for disruption.
5.) Selection of less than 100% of candidates must be random from the 100% of candidates.
Imagine we fired 100% of all Federal employees and elected politicians. All gone. Would this work? Sure. This is an argument of scale. We have 300 million people. With 300 million people anyone can be replaced, tomorrow.

Disruption can be more than just firing people for life. Imagine we moved Washington DC to the very heart of the continental US. Our seat of government would be much safer than it is today, exposed on a coast. We flush the cesspool that is Washington DC down the proverbial toilet by just moving it to say, Colorado.

Again, this is all just flight of fancy. However, it is dead serious in that we are never going to "wipe the slate clean" as disruption through elections today. The corruption that controls our government will ensure that. And for sure the corruption that runs this country would kill The Disruption Amendment proposed above too.

Which brings me back to my opening remark. The main take-away from this blog post is to consider forms of disruption in lieu of revolution. We don't have to chop off people's physical heads to disrupt. We can chop off their power head.  We can disrupt the government for disruption's sake so as to allow some light to shine on new ideas, trying new political ideas such as Irreni World Scale.

Which brings me to my final point. Disruption for disruption's sake is pointless. We should only disrupt markets and governments when at least some new ideas are waiting in the wings ready to grow as disruption ensues. 


Think disruption!

Empathy for all!

Moral relativity: think it, breath it!

Prove it or lose it!

Conversations equal consensus! 

Welcome to the 21st century!

Scale your empathy, scale the world! 

Find your tribe!

Be sexy people!

The future is coming! 

Innovate at a rapid pace!

Slow speed ahead!

Well come! and well met!


  1. Upon finishing reading your words, I wonder about the ideas that are being nurtured at this moment that would relate to a peaceful and innovative revolution to the rule of the world's sole superpower?

    It's in the nature of democracy to not be perfect - but rather be 'more perfect.' As the Apple iPhone disrupted the cellular markets by an act of innovation; would it be plausible that an idea can be nurtured within our democracy that leads to something so innovative? After all, we are still using the same cellular networks and standards ratified by IEEE in the 1980's to operate our cell phone. Calling for a revolution out be a bit too much. Perhaps we need less of a revolution, but perhaps a paradigm shift in how we bring our ideas to legislation and how quickly we get them acted upon?

    Just a thought.

  2. Exactly Ali. I like the more perfect framing on one hand in that it shows a constant upgrading. However, I believe it is worth preserving the word "union" as in "more perfect union". For example, as a planet we Earthlings need to form a more perfect Union to combat global warming. Which brings me to my next point, world scale. We cannot pretend to be just "a country" as the US any more. For better or worse we have committed to global responsibilities. Political innovation moving forward needs to take into account more than any one country's borders. In fact, It is worth exploring whether the concept of country is all that relevant any more and if so formally how?