Our society gives far more leeway to the individual to pursue one’s own ends, but since it defines what is worthy and desirable, everyone tends, independently but monotonously, to pursue the same things in the same way. The first pattern combines cooperation, conformity, and variety; the second, competition, individualism, and uniformity. The war for economic supremacy in the 21^st century has already begun. The main tactical weapons in this global power struggle are traditional. We read about them in the daily headlines—currency manipulation, protectionist trade policies, financial regulations, and the like. However, as in the case of military competition, the truly strategic weapons today are knowledge-based. What counts for each nation in the long run are products of mind-work: scientific and technological research…the education of the work force…sophisticated software…smarter management…advanced communications…electronic finance. These are key sources of tomorrow’s power, and among these strategic weapons none is more important than superior organization—especially the organization of knowledge itself. This, as we shall see next, is what today’s attack on bureaucracy is mainly about. Everyone strongly dislikes a bureaucrat. For a long time businessmen and women maintained the myth that bureaucracy was a disease of government. Civil servants were called lazy, parasitic, and surly, while business executives were pictured as dynamic, productive, and eager to please the customer. Yet bureaucracy is just as rampant in business as in the public sector. Indeed, many of the World’s largest corporations are as arthritic and arrogant as any tyrant. #RandolphHarris 1 of 20

Today a search is on for new ways to organize. In Russia and Eastern Europe the political leadership is at war with elements of its own bureaucracy. Other governments are selling off public enterprises, experimenting with things like merit pay and other innovations in the civil service. However, it is in business that the drive for new organizational formats is most advanced. Hardly a day passes without some new article, book, or speech decrying the old top-down forms of pyramidal power. Management gurus publish case histories of companies experimenting with new organizational approaches, from “underground research” at Toshiba to the antihierarchical structure of Tandem Computers. Managers are advised to take advantage of “chaos,” and a thousand formulas and fads are tried and discarded as fact as new buzz-phrases can be coined. Of course, no one expects bureaucratic organization to disappear. It remains appropriate for some purposes. However, it is now accepted that companies will wither under competitive fire if they cling to the old centralized bureaucratic structures that flourished during the smokestack age. In smokestack societies, even when ultimate power is in the hands of charismatic and even antibureaucratic leaders, it is typically exercised on their behalf by bureaucrats. The police, the army, the corporation, the hospital, the schools, all are organized into bureaucracies, irrespective of the personality or style of their top officers. The revolt against bureaucracy is, in fact, an attack on the dominant form of smokestack power. It coincides with the transition to the super-symbolic economy of the 21^st century, and it explains why those who create “post-bureaucratic” organizations are truly revolutionary, whether they are in business, government, or the civil society. #RandolphHarris 2 of 20

Any bureaucracy has two key features, which can be called “cubbyholes” and “channels.” Because of this, everyday power routine control—is in the hands of two types of executives: specialists and managers. Specialized executives gain their power from control of information in the cubbyholes. Managers gain theirs through their control of information flowing through the channels. It is this power system, the backbone of bureaucracy, which is now coming under fire in large companies everywhere. We think of bureaucracy as a way of grouping people. However, it is also a way of grouping “facts.” A firm neatly cut into departments according to function, market, region, or product is after al a collection of cubbyholes in which specialized information and personal experience are stored. Engineering data go to the engineers; sales data to the sales department. Until the arrival of computers, this “cubbyholism” was the main way in which knowledge was organized for wealth production. And the wondrous beauty of the system was that, at first, it appeared to be endlessly expandable. In theory, one could have an infinity of cubbyholes. In practice, however, companies and governments are now discovering that there are strict limits to this kind of specialization. The limits first became apparent in the public sector as government agencies grew to monstrous proportions, reaching a point of no return. For example, in the Pentagon, so many specialized cubbyhole-units have sprung up that it is impossible for anyone to accurately describe the system with which, and within which, they must operate. #RandolphHarris 3 of 20

As private companies grew to gargantuan size they, too, began to smack up against the limits of organizational specialization. Today, in company after company, the cubbyhole system is crashing under its own weight. Nor is it just bigness that makes it unworkable. Now add to this the growth of a Third Wave population, young, educated self-confident, middle-class, impatient, increasingly nationalist and sure that it—not parents, not workers, and certainly not peasants—is the wave of the future. Surrounded by glittering shopping malls, these young people either have or hunger for a Mercedes or BMW. And they have something China values highly—computer and Internet skills. So highly, indeed, that the People’s Liberation Army has made a deep study of information warfare. It has organized and trained “information militias” and developed doctrines for attacks not merely on enemy military targets, but on foreign business networks, research centers and communication systems. One theory holds that information technology makes possible a war waged not by the military alone but by hundreds of millions of citizens—joined, perhaps, by large numbers of sympathizers in other countries. Together they might use their laptops—sharing unused capacity to create supercomputers—to assault an adversary’s critical infrastructure, including financial networks and other civilian targets. Such an attack would be most effective against the United States of America, since it is the country most heavily dependent on information technology and electronic communications. This, as some have written, would be a striking new version of what Mao called a “People’s War.” #RandolphHarris 4 of 20

What may be overlooked, however, by Chinese information-war enthusiasts is that Mao’s People’s War was waged not in defense of an existing government but in an effort to overthrow it. And it is just as conceivable that millions of Chinese who engage in information combat might someday turn their know-how against the reigning Communist Party in defense of their own Third Wave self-interests. In a civil war, they might turn their laptops against the People’s Liberation Army itself. Protests may start small, but history shows just how dangerous wave conflicts can become when they escalate. It was the clash between an industrializing North and a backward, slave-based agrarian South that led to the Civil War in the United States of America in 1861-65. It was conflict that lay behind Japan’s Meiji Restoration a few years later. Wave conflict was reflected in the Russian Revolution of 1917. And conflicting wave interests in Asia—usually disguised as urban-versus—rural, ethnic or religious in nature—underlie violence today in India, Thailand and other nearby countries as well. However, these conflicts all counterposed two wealth systems. In emergent China there are three, each with sharply different needs and interests—confronting its government with unprecedented tensions. China’s economic advance cannot continue in a straight line, unperturbed. It cannot avoid wave conflict. It will no doubt crash and recover more than once in the decades to come, sending successive jolts through the global economy. #RandolphHarris 5 of 20

The country is not quite at the edge of calamity, but to many Beijing seems increasingly out of touch and out of control in whole swaths of the country. As an editorial in Xinhua, the official Chinese news agency, put it, China will either enjoy a “golden development” or enter a “contradictions-stricken age” of chaos. This does not imply that its long-term twin-track strategy will fail. However, technology and economics are the easy part of any revolution. Beijing is skilled at dealing with protests by farmers fighting the corruption of local government or industrial workers demanding jobs. However, it is more worried about escalation than it lets on. This helps explain its seemingly extreme response to the cultist quasi-religious Falun Gong movement, whose members have been imprisoned and, according to some reports, brutalized and even killed. Falun Gong insists it is not a political movement at all. However, when it brought as many as thirty thousand members from all over China to the very walls of Zhongnanhai, the government compound in Beijing, to protest repression, it called up still-fresh memories of the Tiananmen Square tragedy. What rocked China’s leaders may not have been the movement’s religio-mystical ideology, replete with demons and aliens from other planets, or its exercise regimen, but the mere fact that it was not restricted to a single locality or region. Falun Gong was big. And its reach was national. Even more worrisome, many of its followers were in the police and military. #RandolphHarris 6 of 20

Historically, Beijing has tried to block large-scale organization by any group other than the Communist Party itself. However, its ability to do so is rapidly declining as widespread mobile phones, the Internet and other technologies make it easier for protesters to organize. That raises a threat for the Communist leadership—something that runs like a bloody thread throughout the history of communism the concept of a worker-peasant coalition. This was precisely what the Chinese Communist Party itself attempted to create until Mao split with his Russian advisers and built his revolutionary force around peasants, rather than harder-to-recruit workers. Because of their competing needs, today’s First Wave peasants, Second Wave workers and Third Wave advocates would be hard to unite in opposition to the government—unless…Busy people focus on the immediate future and pay attention only to what they regard as the most likely of scenarios. Yet if history teaches us anything, it is that extremely unlikely events often shake the World. What, for example, was more unlikely than two commercial jetliners destroying the World Trade Center? China, too, may surprise us. What follows is, admittedly, most unlikely. However, a convergence of high-probability events such as those cited above—a financial collapse, for example, coming at the same time as an epidemic outbreak and war with Taiwan—can easily trigger a far more serious low-probability crisis. #RandolphHarris 7 of 20

Imagine, as some in Beijing no doubt do, the ultimate nightmare vision in which a future Mao—a Mao II—arises: A charismatic leader who, given enough unrest and upheaval, could sweep aside the current leadership and introduce something beyond the West’s imagination. Not a Communist Mao or even a capitalist Mao but, in a country hungry for something to replace the near religion of Marxism, a Mao who gathers workers and peasants and young Third Wave elements together under a religious flag. That religion could be Christianity, which is growing rapidly across China. More likely, it would be some bizarre new religion growing out of one of the countless cults that now abound in the nation. There is a seething cauldron of religious and quasi-religious activity and competition especially in the countryside, and conservatively there is an estimated 260 million Chinese that are regular or casual followers of various religious faiths in the country. “Christian sects form and mutate…, vying to attract the same disadvantaged classes…There are the Shouters and the Spirit Church, the Disciples Association and White Sun, the Holistic Church and the Crying Faction. Many are apocalyptic. A few are strongly anti-Communist. Three Grades of Servants and Easter Lightning are among the largest, each claiming memberships in the millions. Now imagine Zhongnanhai in the hands of new, potentially fanatic management—and in control of China’s nuclear weapons and its missiles. Or imagine competing warlord cult leaders in charge of different provinces. #RandolphHarris 8 of 20

So extreme a scenario may seem impossible, even inconceivable to Western readers and leaders. However, it would not be the first time in China that a cultish religious mass movement ignited large-scale bloodshed, tried to overthrow the government and tore parts of China to shreds. That is precisely what happened when Hong Xiuquan, having convinced himself he was Jesus’ brother, and therefore a son of God, recruited followers, built an army, stormed north out of Guangxi Province and set out in 1851 to overthrow the Manchu Dynasty. His troops—including ferocious all-female combat units—took Yongan, moved into Hunan and captured Yuezhou, Hankou, Wuchang and Nanjing, which he then ruled for eleven years until, at last, his Taiping Rebellion was put down, having claimed at least 20 million lives. Of course, a religious Mao II scenarios is unlikely, but the Chinese remember this history all too well, and this explains why something like the Mao II scenario may seem less improbable to them than to the outside World. That excruciating memory may be another reason for the government’s vicious crackdown on Falun Gong. When the West prods China to speed its transition to democracy, the almost certain response echoes what Zhao Ziyang, then general secretary of the Communist Party, told us in Beijing in 1988. When we pressed hm about the need for democracy, Zhao told us: “Stability is necessary to make democratic advances.” #RandolphHarris 9 of 20

Westerners may ho-hum about stability. The Chinese cannot—not when the deaths of tens of millions during the so-called Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution are still so fresh, so painful—and so personal. China went through its own version of hell during those periods, and the West stood by, unaffected, because China was cut off from economic relations at that time. Today, by contrast, foreigners—Americans, Europeans, Japanese, South Koreans, Singaporeans and others—own billions of dollars’ worth of Chinese factories, real estate and other fixed assets. Were violence in China to escalate, the central government would have a hard time keeping it secret from its own people, now armed with the Web and mobile phones. If protesters begin demanding regional secession (already an issue in China’s Muslim northwest), and social breakdown converges with other crises into what Kenneth Courtis, vice chairman of Goldman Sachs Asia, has suggested to us could become a “volcanic explosion,” it is unlikely that the outside World will just stand by passively with its assets at risk. Given runaway escalation, outsiders might not only yank their financial investments but meddle covertly inside China in an effort to protect their factories and other physical assets—even perhaps, by making deals with corrupt local officials and rebel military commanders. That happened during the 1930s, when China was under attack by Japan and torn by revolution. It must not happen again. #RandolphHarris 10 of 20

China’s development into a contemporary, affluent World power can be detoured, blunted, reversed for years. China may be beset by tragedy. However, it is in the interest of the human race as a whole that its shaky, corrupt, frightening, painful experiment in the twin-track reduction of poverty not be allowed to fail. For how it deals with its collision of wealth waves will affect jobs, portfolios and products, right on down to the clothes our children wear and the computers they use. China is now a part of us all. A corollary of this latent desire for social confrontation is the desire for an incorruptible human—a human who cannot be bribed, who does not have a price. Once again this desire is a recessive trait, relegated largely to the realm of folk drama and movie script, but it exists nonetheless, as a silent rebellion against the oppressive democratic harmony of a universal monetary criterion. Today, chemists work with huge numbers of molecules and study them using clever, indirect techniques. Making a new molecule can be a major project, and studying it can be another. Molecular manufacturing will help chemists make what they want to study, and it will help them make the tools they need to study it. Nanoinstruments will be used to prod, measure, and modify molecules in a host of ways, studying their structures, behaviors, and interaction. Currently, materials scientists make new superconductors, semiconductors, and structural materials by mixing and crushing and baking and freezing, and so forth. They dream of far more structure than they can make, and they stumble across more things than they plan. #RandolphHarris 11 of 20

With molecular manufacturing, materials science can be much more systematic and thorough. New idea can be tested because new materials can be built according to plan (rather than playing around, groping for a recipe). Biologists use a host of molecular devices borrowed from biology to study biology. Many of these can be viewed as molecular machines. Nanotechnology will greatly advance biology by providing better molecular devices, better nanoinstruments. Some cells have already been mapped in amazing molecular detail, but biology still has far to go. With nanoinstruments (including molecule-by-molecule disassemblers), biologists will at last be able to map cells completely and study their interactions in detail. It will become easy not only to find molecules in cells, but to learn what they do. This will help in understanding disease and the molecular requirements for health enormously advancing medicine. As we speak, computers range from a million to a billion times faster than an old desktop adding machine, and the results have been revolutionary for science. Every year, more questions can be answered by calculations based on known principles of physics. The advent of nanocomputers—even slow, miserable, mechanical nanocomputers—will give us practical machines with a trillion times the power of today’s computers (essentially by letting us package a trillion computers in a small space, without gobbling too much money or energy.) The consequences will again be revolutionary. #RandolphHarris 12 of 20

The known principles of physics are adequate for understanding molecules, materials, and cells, but not for understanding phenomena on a scale that would still be submicroscopic if atoms were the size of marbles. Nanotechnology cannot help here directly, but it can provide manufacturing facilities that will make huge particle accelerators economical, where today they strain national budgets. More generally, nanotechnology will help science wherever precision and fine details are important. Science frequently proceeds by trying small variations in almost identical experiments, comparing the results. This will be easier when molecular manufacturing can make two objects that are identical, molecule by molecule. In some areas, today’s techniques are not only crude, but destructive. Archaeological sites are unique records of the human past, but today’s techniques throw away most information during the dig, by accident. Future archaeologists, able to sift soil not speck by speck but molecule by molecule, will be grateful indeed to those archaeologists who today leave some ground undisturbed. Of all the area where the ability to manufacture new tools is important, medicine is perhaps the greatest. The human body is intricate, and that intricacy extends beyond the range of human vision, beyond microscopic imaging, down to the molecular scale. “Molecular medicine” is an increasingly popular term today, but medicine today has only the simplest molecular tools. #RandolphHarris 13 of 20

As biology uses nanoinstruments to learn about disease and health, we will learn the physical requirements for restoring and maintaining health. And with this knowledge will come the tools needed to satisfy those requirments—tools ranging from improved pharmaceuticals to devices able to repair cells and tissues through molecular surgery. Advanced medicine will be among the most complex and difficult applications of nanotechnology. It will require great knowledge, but nanoinstruments will help gather this knowledge. It will pose great engineering challenges, but computers of trillionfold greater power will help meet those challenges. It will solve medical problems on which we spend billions of dollars today, in hopes of modest improvements. Furthermore, modern medicine often means an expensive way to prolong misery. Will nanomedicine be more of the same? Any reader over the age of, day, thirty knows how things start to go wrong: an ache here, a burn there, the loss of an ability. Over the decades, the physical quality of life declines faster and faster—the limits of what the body can do become stricter—until the limits are those of a hospital bed. The healing abilities we have when young seem to fade away. Modern medical practice expands the bulk of its effort on such things as intensive-care units, dragging out the last few years of life without restoring health. Truly advanced medicine will be able to restore and supplement the youthful ability to heal. Its cost will depend on the cost of producing things more intricate than any we have seen before, the cost of producing computers, sensors, and the like by the trillions. #RandolphHarris 14 of 20

However, while computers are important, so is the human mind. Recent research finds that many people have not been keeping informed about the work of our scientists of the mind. Psychological researchers have discovered that people fear death. The fear of death is given a central and often unsuspected role in psychological life. To whom death’s role is unsuspected we are told, but this theory supports the sufficiently rich to allow the hypothesis that all cultures prescribe what people should do to lead a “good” and “meaningful” life and offer some hope of immortality, as in the Christian afterlife or the Hindu notion of reincarnation into a better life. As if this were not enough, the same psychologist has discovered that how one reacts to death depends on one’s moral code, and that those who value open-mindedness are more tolerant of people whose values differ from theirs—which means that those who are open-minded tend to be more reasonable and understanding, a fact that is not sufficiently appreciated, if known at all. Students who come from intact families that value degrees tend to do well in school. In addition, psychologists have discovered that children who are inept at social relations tend to be unpopular with other children. #RandolphHarris 15 of 20

These reports are important because they are considered by many to be the new “public record” and may be assumed to be reporting the best social science. It is possible, of course, that a “mole,” or an undercover agent, who is trying to reveal where our culture stands by ridiculing the trivialities of social science. The study of human behavior, when conducted according to the rigorous principles established by the physical and biological sciences, will produce objective facts, testable theories, and profound understandings of the human condition. Perhaps even universal laws. I have previously attributed the origins of this belief to the work of Auguste Comte, which is a defensible position but something of an oversimplification. In fact, the beginning formulations of a “science of man” are more precisely attributed to a school than to a man. The school, founded in 1794 in Paris, was called the Ecole Polytechnique (the same school that, as I mentioned earlier, quickly adopted the practice begun at Cambridge of assigning number grades to student work). The Ecole Polytechnique gathered for its teaching staff the best scientists, mathematicians, and engineers France had produced, and became famous for its enthusiasm for the methods of the natural sciences. Lavoisier and Ampere taught there, as did, later, Volta and Alexander von Humbolt. Their work in chemistry and physics helped to lay the foundation of modern science, and in that respect the Ecole Polytechnique is justly honored. #RandolphHarris 16 of 20

However, there were others associated with the school whose exuberance for the methods of the natural sciences led them to believe that there were no limits to the powers of the human mind, and in particular no limits to the power of scientific research. The most famous expression of what may be called “scientific hubris” appeared in Pierre-Simon de Laplace’s Essai philosophique sur les probabilites, published in 1814. He wrote: “A mind that in a given instance knew all the forces by which nature is animated and the position of all the bodies of which it is composed, if it were vast enough to include all these data within his analysis, could embrace in one single formula the movements of the largest bodies of the Universe and of the smallest atoms; nothing would be uncertain for him; the future and the past would be equally before his eyes.” There is, of course, no scientist today who takes this view seriously, and there were few enough who did in the nineteenth century. However, the spirit behind this scientific ideal inspired several men to believe that reliable and predictable knowledge that could be obtained about stars and atoms could also be obtained about human behavior. Among the best known of these early “social scientists” were Claude-Henri de Saint-Simon, Prosper Enfantin, and, of course, Auguste Comte. They held in common two beliefs to which Technopoly is deeply indebted: that the natural sciences provide a method to unlock the secrets of both the human heart and the direction of social life; that society can be rationally and humanely reorganized according to principles that social science will uncover. #RandolphHarris 17 of 20

It is with these humans that the idea of “social engineering” beings and the seeds of Scientism are planted. By Scientism, I mean three interrelated ideas that, take together, stand as one of the pillars of Technopoly. Two of the three have just be cited. The first and indispensable idea is, as noted, that the methods of the natural sciences can be applied to the study of human behavior. This idea is the backbone of much of psychology and sociology as practiced at least in America, and largely accounts for the fact that social science, to quote F. A. Hayek, “has contributed scarcely anything to our understanding of social phenomena.” The second idea is, also noted, that social science generates specific principles which can be used to organize society on a rational and humane basis. This implies that technical means—mostly “invisible technologies” supervised by experts—can be designed to control human behavior and set it on the proper course. The third idea is that faith in science can serve as a comprehensive belief system that gives meaning to life, as well as a sense of well-being, morality, and even immortality. We will later investigate how these ideas spiral into each other, and how they give energy and form to Technopoly. Nonetheless, there have been many complaints in recent years that independence training is less rigorous than it once was, but again, as in the case of competitiveness, this is hard to assess. To be one’s own in a simple, stable, and familiar environment requires a good deal less internal “independence” than to be on one’s own in a complex, shifting, and strange one. Religion helps us deal with our entire being. #RandolphHarris 18 of 20

There are several persons in God. For the word “person” signifies in God a relation as subsisting in the divine nature. It was also established that there are several real relations in God; and hence it follows that there are also several realities subsistent in the divine nature; which means that there are several persons in God. The definition of “person” includes “substance,” not as meaning the essence, but the “suppositum” which is made clear by the addition of the term “individual.” To signify the substance thus understood, the Greeks use the name “hypostasis.” So, as we say, “Three persons,” they say “Three hypostases.” We are not, however, accustomed to say Three substances, lest we be understood to mean three essences or natures, by reason of the equivocal signification of the term. The absolute properties in God, such as goodness and wisdom, are not mutually opposed; and hence, neither are they really distinguished from each other. Therefore, although they subsist, nevertheless they are not several subsistent realities—that is, several persons. However, the absolute properties in creatures do not subsist, although they are really distinguished from each other, as whiteness and sweetness; on the other hand, the relative properties in God subsist, and are really distinguished from each other. Hence the plurality of persons in God. The supreme unity and simplicity of God exclude every kind of plurality of absolute things, but not plurality of relations. Because relations are predicated relatively, and thus the relations do not import composition in that of which they are predicated, as Boethius teaches in the same book. #RandolphHarris 19 of 20

Number is twofold, simple or absolute, a two and three and four; and number as existing in things numbered, as two men and two BMWs. So, if number in God is taken absolutely or abstractedly, there is nothing to prevent whole and part from being in Him, and thus number in Him is only our way of understanding; forasmuch as number regarded apart from things numbered exists only in the intellect. However, if number be taken as it is in the things numbered, in that sense as existing in creatures, one is part of two, and two of three, as one man is part of two men, and two of three; but this does not apply to God, because the Father is of the same magnitude as the whole Trinity. Humans who proclaim Thy sovereignty in witness to Thy truth, acknowledging Thy guidance, Thy wisdom, Thy power; humans who break every idol blindly wrought, dispelling the darkness with Thy spirit of light. O Lord, give us steadfast men! Men like Joseph, who though great in the land, remember their kinsmen in time of distress, who seek out their brothers, proffering the hand of kinship and kindness, of rescue and strength; who harbor no malice nor sanction revenge, forbearing, forgiving, forgetting past wrongs; who contribute richly to the land of their birth, yet never forget Zion, Israel’s ancient land. O Lord, give us inspired humans! Humans like Moses, who hearken to Thy voice, revealing Thine eternal truths and teaching us Thy Law. Lord please give us consecrated leaders, faithful to Thy will, pathfinders through life’s bewildering maze. Please give us humans to teach us, humans to make us know, that Torah is our way of life, and righteousness our goal. With such humans to guide us, our faith shall never fail, our courage never falter; our future is assured. #RandolphHarris 20 of 20

Cresleigh Homes

Ready for a sectional that fits the ENTIRE family – even aunts and uncles? 😍 Ready for a living space that accommodates even the most lively of fall parties? 🍂 You’re looking for #Havenwood Model 4.

Homesite 27 is ready for new owners, and we think you might be the perfect fit! Interested? Call (916) 409-5595 today! https://cresleigh.com/havenwood/residence-four/

#CresleighHomes