Networks and Hierarchies

Hieararchy is a form of network with the classic militaristic top down structure.  The more totalitarian a structure, like the Communist socialist structure, the more controlled the network.  The more libertarian a structure is the more diffuse and free without the top down authoritarianism.  Fear and greed beget Authoritarian structures and especially the totalitarian.  

In medicine there is an academic ‘voluntary’ relationship between among physicians.  Prince among princes, is a term for this libertarian relationship of one to another. In this model a specialists ‘advises’ a generalist physician but does not dictate. The ‘front line’ worker is always respected as the person with greatest responsibility and accountability.  In the militaristic authoritarian totalitarian structure the flow of command is top down. 

In the militia, the voluntary nature of the membership was associated with soldiers voting with their ‘feet’, coming and going.  Involuntary membership was associated with the ‘regular army’ with it’s power to hang for ‘desertion’ and a multitude of other offences.

In the medical model, the ‘regulatory’ bodies have usurped the ‘academic’ model or the ‘clinical’ model and increasingly it would appear that the ‘elite’ authority are not only broadly ruling on practice but actually ‘dictating’ the practice of medicine.  The individual physician is increasingly expected to do what he or she is told to do based on euphemistic expressions like ‘best practice’ and ‘evidence based.’  Such terms are ‘text book’ and ‘academic’ and refer to ‘groups’ and ‘broad determinants ‘ of practice which previously had ‘guided’ the individual clinician.  Today though these ‘guidelines’are maintained by the lowest common denominator of authority, legalistic, or militaristic, decision making.  

Any variations from these ‘commands’ are then decided individually by the 19th century rationalism of the ‘game’ of law.  

To identify ‘flaw’ of the law, one merely has to consider the failure of the law to be relevant in all matters ‘Sexual’.  Historic ‘chivarly’ was an agreed relational model for predominantly white upper class participants in a western enlightenment theistic era, where ‘truth’ was considered ‘one’ and ‘authoritative’.  

In post modernism ‘truth’ is ‘relative’ and no one of this ilk feels obligated to tell the ‘whole truth and nothing but the truth’.  Lies are the norm of the courts and even quasi legal authorities with ‘politics’ and ‘favoritism’ overriding the ‘objective ‘truth’.  All is now ‘subjective’.

Women sexually have not be ‘verbal’ in their traditional sexual advances whereas men have been. The man in traditional cultures has ‘initiated’ sex with ‘risk taking’ advances’.  By contrast women have ‘invited’ sex with ‘overt’ invitation.  

Today we have untold hundreds of thousands of men , perhaps millions, maybe trillions falsely accused of sexual Harrassment while women perform ‘slutwalks’ and conveniently ‘deny’ their participation when their sexual agenda is not supported.

Indeed women walk about in vagina hats or pussy hats when all of the legal structure of present society was based on the ‘modest’ and ‘truthful’ woman.

Multiculturalism further obscures the matter because there are indeed cultures where women are the aggressors but men cannot complain about being sexually assaulted as in the culture he is expected to physically beat unwanted females off him, rather than turn to the courts to assist him.

The rate limiting step in the ‘network’ is indeed the ‘hierarchy’ which persists in increasing restrictivenessa and a desire for increasing ‘top down’ structure.  

Presently there is an increasingly pressure on scientists to ‘be popular’ and to ‘have good ratings’ the extreme of which is the Chinese Citizenship Scales celebrating acceptance of authority and promoting individuals without traits to deviate.

Deviance is ironically like the Chinese curse and blessing, may you live in interesting times, interesting. When Canadian women doctors supporting eugenics the precursor of Nazi Final Solution, looked at breeding out ‘deviant’ behaviour it was found that the most successful had themselves deviance or a deviant near relatives. Schizophrenia and genius run in families.

The concern then with communist socialist totalitarian structures and ‘generally’ ‘authoritarian political regulatory’’ ‘quasi legal’ agencies is that beurocracies such as the Chinese Citizenship beurocracy will favour ‘obedience’ over ‘exceptionoal’

Clearly the ‘fearful’ and ‘hateful’ want ‘control’ and ‘dominance’ and fear ‘outliers’ . Herod fearing the birth of Jesus, killed all infants under 2 year old to maintain his position of militaristic authority.

Given that the ‘reformer is the enemy of anyone who benefits from the status quo’ it’s critical to see that these ‘stagnant heirarchal networks’ can’ compete with the more ‘guerilla based’ ‘fluid networks especially in the sciences.  

Steal a little and they put you in jail, steal a lot and they make you king.  The belief of the thug revoluationaries like the communist peasants and the Zimbabwe revolutionaries was that they could take the position of authority with a gun or laws and dominate the ‘networks’ with the rigid controlling militaristic authoritarian regulatory hierarchies.  This worked in the time of Ghengis khan but not today.  

Networks are simply too complex for those with only ‘position authority’ to rule wisely.  Thugs with guns can’t make quantum physicists out compete others even by holding their wives and children hostage.  The cave men painted the walls after successful kills.