We inhabit distributed sociopolitical information systems that play out logical symmetries (i.e. of mathematics, physics) through the transmission medium of aggregate human agency as behavioural (essentially cognitive) micro-systems of and as decision-making machines. Does the transmission medium (i.e. human agency, volition, free will) drive the system or does the system almost entirely and autonomously self-propagate through a transmission medium (of agents) that is always and already “primed” for difference (and dissonance) as a foundational property of self-definition and political – if not core psychological – self-identity? Is the indeterminacy (i.e. tendency towards near-stalemates) of such large-scale distributed systems a function of the fact that such uncertainty and poorly-defined end-states are the most effective solutions, not so much to political decision-making in either the micro or the macro-scale, but to an effective, autonomously self-propagating and sustainable continuity of the complex sociopolitical information system itself?
These systems most efficiently and effectively self-propagate (in gestalt) through the conflicted transmission medium of persons and tribes they (quite foundationally) inhabit.
Daedelus Kite 