Formal Organization Creates Dark Organization

exterminate_all_rational_thought_-_william_steward_burroughs

Exterminate all rational thought.1

Wherever human society goes, it creates the seeds of its own destruction. I posit that this occurs as a result of the increasing formalization of organization, meaning that instead of leaving choices to humans alone on the basis of their judgment alone, rules and structures are written down and enforced in an effort to perfect a process and also make it easy for a person of average ability. This explains why every human civilization so far has failed at the height of its power.

Formal order, or that which involves rules and procedures instead of generalized goals with latitude for the individual to succeed or fail much as they do under Darwinian nature, creates dark organization through the following methods:

  • Absolutism. Rights and other one-way measures of authority take the place of choosing to approve or disapprove of actions on the basis of their likelihood of achieving the goal. In this way, authority takes the place of reality, much as in civilization social pressures replace reality as well. Both of these are subsets of the general pattern of the human ego replacing reality, and demanding that others acknowledge its reality as a means of denying possibly unpleasant aspects of existence.
  • Selection bias.
    1. People: formal organizations select people who seek power or wealth for their own sake. Since formal organizations replace reality-based methods of selecting success, those who fulfill the needs of the formalized process are rewarded. This is simpler than making things simply work, which attracts both the less able and drives away the more able who find it tedious.
    2. Facts: formal organizations create a process of rationalism, or searching for some answer that fulfills a predefined objective. This objective occurs independent of the whole, or on the level of detail, which filters out noticing of that which clashes with what is being done at a lower level, which means that people robotically apply procedure to detail, and that higher-ups never hear about the inadequacies of their models.
  • Careerism. Formal organizations reward doing what those above demand in preference to achieving a complete task in its own right. As a result, those who succeed are not the competent but the socially-competent, and people are driven by fear of not meeting requirements, not failing in their task. The person who produces irrelevant or wrong results which fulfill the needs of the process will be rewarded over the one who notices that something is amiss in the mental model being used, or achieves the task without doing all of the steps that please higher-ups.
  • Subsets. By the nature of formalization itself, wider questions are reduced to pre-defined narrower ones. This both enables the process to work through deconstruction, or dividing big questions into many smaller ones, and through use of average people, who can obey recipes and rules but not (perhaps) ascertain what is needed and critically assess it on their own. The result is that the lost data becomes a “conspiracy of details” which although small fractions at each part of the process add up to a much larger amount on the level of the whole.

If you wonder why civilization always fails, it is because it its own worst enemy: the process of civilizing, when not stopped before it becomes formalization for its own sake, produces robotic people who are masters of details and oblivious to reality and the whole question of each task.

This manifests most in the workplace and school, but also undermines the social process. Instead of the role of being a good friend, people seek others who flatter them and meet their personal needs for objects such as people to engage in social activities with. This reverses selection for the best people, and instead creates a need for obedient ones who do not care about the consequences of their actions.

As such, formalization is a removal of responsibility. Instead of being accountable for end results, people are assessed by the fulfillment of tasks designed artificially: doing their work on homework assignments, filling out the right paperwork, saying the right thing in a political speech or social engagement.

Formalization rewards lowercase-c conservatism, or conformity to process, past successes and the opinions of others. Someone who does a task in a different way is at risk even if he succeeds, but someone who follows the process will be rewarded even if she fails.

It has long been clear to me that human “best intentions” are the cause of the decline of complex societies. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions, as they say, and our best intentions have us find a right way to do things, then write it down, and then to control others in order to force them to follow this one right way. From that comes a form of internal entropy, division and eventually, mediocrity and doom.


1 — William S. Burroughs, as cited in the movie Naked Lunch and derived from his early works.

Tags: , , , ,

8 Responses to “Formal Organization Creates Dark Organization”

  1. 1349 says:

    Without formalization we will live in mud huts or, more likely, caves. Formalization is vital if you want to organize complex knowledge and complex technology. You probably haven’t lived in a society where people can’t (= lack intelligence to) write down some basic things that they understand but instead have to orally explain them to every new student, personally, and thus waste time.

    Also, language itself is formalization. It involves rules, formal logic, repetition of patterns.
    Rules of an organization are a kind of language that the organization, as a hyper-person, formulates its “thoughts” in.
    Formalization is necessary (but not sufficient) for civilization to be intact.

    • Without formalization we will live in mud huts or, more likely, caves.

      Is this so? It seems to me that the first person to make a house will be emulated.

      Formalization is a difficult concept, but it essentially means rules based on boundaries, rather than cooperative goals.

  2. Johann Theron says:

    Wow, I am amazed. This opens up so many avenues for further investigation.(not academic research). For example, the lack lack of responsibility is palpable and is demonstrated by the entire SJW emergence. It can be taken further by using pride as another value where responsibility is not possible without pride, which leads to another thing called “expectation” being a future concept for which pride and responsibility is impossible. But when this simulcrum future is endangered by “words” the liberal or cucked gets their feelings in a knot, all of which is unrealistic since it is based on a future simulation. All of this creating the dark mantle of chaos confusing the world and disgracing our history, which is not a simulation. I could carry on, and so should you. My latest realization came via Richard Spencer when he remarked that we are moving past legalities and are moving towards civilization. Indeed, a wider view to see our “forest” again through this dark cloud is required and this article advances that endeavor to no end. Well done, I could never have done it. (hope this makes sense by the way)

    • My latest realization came via Richard Spencer when he remarked that we are moving past legalities and are moving towards civilization.

      A good insight. Government and legalities are surrogates for culture, which is more flexible and less generalized than those forms of control. We either have cooperation, where we all work toward a similar goal through similar principles, or we accept everyone and try to pare back their behavior with the carrot and stick, which creates an epicycle of rebellion that eventually takes over control and pushes it toward extreme permissiveness. Your writings on this site have been informative in exploring this idea.

  3. […] succeed in formalized human groups, you must deny reality and focus on human pretense. The same is true in social settings: what makes […]

  4. […] this reason, formalization is the enemy of survival, because it creates a dissipation of energy that leads to dark organization within a human group. […]

  5. […] war against proxies, or intermediate human measurements which can be gamed and therefore create dark organization within human groups. Proxies create conditions for their own satisfaction which do not achieve […]

  6. […] system is perfect, but the best system is informal and emphasizes strong power with high accountability, or “skin in the game” as those […]

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>