Up to this point in history, society has consistently accepted some measure of domestication in its pursuit of a more perfect civilization. To many, the populace must be controlled and taxed in order for society to prosper. The average individual, however, is powerless in comparison to any significant group that holds influence in government. Regardless of intent, majority rule obliviates the individual. Freedom is considered to be relative, not absolute.
The Crew Network is an organizational structure that corrects this deficiency and optimizes its remedy. By design, it consists entirely of Laws existing in nature rather than Rules invented by man. By leveraging forces of nature, it opens a path out of domestication and onward to a higher form of civilization.
Herein lies the blueprint for a voluntary, autonomous, and sustainable society.
I, the Person, am an autonomous member of society. As such, I am neither slave nor master, neither in whole nor in part. My associations are voluntary, as is my cooperation with fellow members of society.
I chart my own course through life, I choose with whom I associate, and I make my domicile a better place in this world. As such, I reject those who would dictate the terms of my existence, and likewise refuse to violate the autonomy of others.
I alone own my thoughts, I alone define my words, and I alone must account for my decisions and actions.
We humans exist as individuals; sentient and autonomous. We are members of a species that is inherently social and, like any other, favors its members who are both independent and inter-dependent.
It is incumbent upon each of us to seek answers to fundamental questions. No individual has all the answers. We make up our own minds, or so we should. Compulsory man-made rules create artificial social constructs. Such rules, unlike the laws of nature, are created by some men to control other men.
In a majority rule system, the whole point of voting is to influence the collective outcome: the will of the group. This objective is at odds with autonomy. So too is submitting to the will of a group, one brimming with strangers and their influencers.
Whereas the concept of self-government is intended to champion freedom and individual liberty, in practice it gives advantage to collective groups over independent individuals. The collective eventually puts the mandates of government, as its representative, ahead of the autonomy of the individual.
"We the people" is a linguistically ambiguous term, perhaps intentionally so. 'We' can mean one body of people, and it can mean a number of distinct individuals; singular or plural. Influencers aside, 'We' constitutes a group of like-minded people who compete with other groups, and the most powerful group determines who rules over all. 'We' is divided.
A group isn't sentient; only individuals are. But groups react to stimuli, as does any collective. Therefore, to collect the social power of a group, one needs only to significantly influence that group. 'By any means necessary,' once an act of desperation, becomes a tool of subjugation. This unnatural social hierarchy rewards manipulation. It does not benefit our species collectively or individually, but rather pits the one against the many.
Mankind benefits by gaining and applying knowledge of nature. It is entirely possible to design social structures that benefit from forces of nature. Only a voluntary system of organization can ensure individual autonomy and free association, but it must also have the social power of collective thought, word, and action. Nature provides a means to attain both freedom and power, without one coming at the expense of the other. To the contrary, they work in tandem, each supporting the other.
Nature favors a society where the individual and the group are in stable harmony. In contrast, the 'individual vs the group' is less stable and inherently suboptimal. Any advancing society, large or small, has two fundamental components: competent individuals & mutually-beneficial relationships. Following nature's lead, this kernel can be the core of a purpose-built society.
With such a system, the path to prominence is not with competing groups and diminished individuality, but with a strong and efficient social hierarchy that rewards the best of human nature. Bonds of kith and kin are the most durable in a natural society, as are life long compatriots. These personal bonds anchor and bind the system.
Comparatively, the weakest and least trustworthy relationships are the one-way kind that pass through multiple hands via intermediary social organs. Trust and accountability become once-removed from the individual, and susceptible to manipulation by persons unknown, naturally having their own intentions, they.
A social system, in order to fully benefit humanity, must be a fully human system. It must work now as well as in the future, but it must likewise be equally applicable to all societies, from any past age or epoch. While such a system can make use of technology, it must nonetheless be valid independent of technology. Such a system is possible because, at a fundamental level, such systems have existed as long as humanity itself.
Following nature's lead, a self-organizing, self-correcting, and self-sustaining society must also be self-replicating to be practical and viable. Much like an organism, the most beneficial social system would make use of processes that nature already provides and life depends upon. Humanity has such a need.
We, as self-determining individuals, hereby choose to join with others of like mind and spirit. Through our voluntary person-to-person associations, we further choose to develop socially beneficial interdependence, all within a natural social system that preserves individual autonomy and free association.
Use of this Constitution implies you and your associates will enjoy these rights and honor these responsibilities within your autonomous group. This Code of Conduct is common to every individual that makes use of this Constitution.
Right: To associate, to not associate, or to dissociate with anyone.
Responsibility: To be an independent individual as well as an interdependent associate.
Right: To protect yourself, your associates, and your assets.
Responsibility: To use force wisely and efficiently, and to account for vital resources.
Right: To your own thoughts, words, and deeds as an extension of yourself.
Responsibility: To seek wisdom, to understand others, and to account for your actions.
To provide a social structure that maximizes the natural human ability to thrive in a free society, and to thereby contribute to a better human condition.
This Constitution provides a social structure that maintains freedom, rewards conservation, and protects expression. Its voluntary associations are built upon trust, competence, and accountability; its hierarchy benefits those who are independent as well as interdependent, and its adoption provides collective purpose, focus, and power.
This Constitution describes a self-defining, self-organizing, self-supporting, self-regulating, self-correcting, and self-sustaining social organization. Its architecture relies exclusively on the Laws of nature, and it is both scalable and repeatable. This architecture fosters creation of a competence-based social hierarchy, consisting entirely of voluntary and mutually-beneficial associations among like-minded individuals.
Three or more individuals establish an autonomous group. They collectively define their membership requirements, their common mission, and their individual responsibilities. They choose one fellow member to represent the group, as a whole, as their elector. Aside from themselves, they have no authority over any other individuals or groups.
Three or more autonomous groups each have electors. The electors create a new autonomous group, as before. This new group is at a higher level, elector-to-elector, thereby establishing a hierarchy. As before, they now collectively define their network membership requirements, their common network mission, and their constituent groups' responsibilities. They choose one fellow elector to represent them as the leader of the newly created network.
To expand a network of autonomous groups, repeat the network establishment process. Three or more smaller networks combine into a single larger network.
The highest level leaders of each contributing network form a new autonomous group, adding a new layer to the network hierarchy. Within an expanding hierarchy, one advancing leader now carries another yet higher burden of leadership, but his available manpower grows exponentially with each higher level. The highest leader in a network still retains one autonomous group at every level of the network, all person-to-person.
The establishment process may be reversed as necessary to reduce the size of a network. Each division reduces the hierarchy by one level, and severs the associations among the remaining constituent groups. Any individual can divide a network by withdrawing from it. Only his associations are affected; the remainder of networks remain intact and their groups remain autonomous. It takes less work to divide a network than to expand one, so networks seek a stable and necessary point of manageability.
All associations that form the organizational structure of their network are votes for expansion or division. These are cast, witnessed, and validated by the voting group members themselves.
These physical models use steel ballbearings to represent people (nodes), and magnets to represent their relationships (lines).
NOTE: The Founding Documents (above) use this organizational structure.
This is an organizational model of three crewmates. They are the foundation the Crew Network. As organizational peers, they are at the same level in the model. Mutually-beneficial relationships hold the crewmates together like magnets.
This model shows the same three crewmen, but one of them has a 2nd job as well: that of being crewchief. This creates a 2-level hierarchy. with one individual holding two positions. To use a military analogy, three soldiers are in a foxhole, but one also has a radio.
This model shows three crews. They are not associated with each other, but they collectively have the ability to join together. Apart, they are three separate 3-manpower crews. Together they could become a 9-manpower coalition.
This model shows three crews. The crewchiefs of each crew are in communication with each other. This allows them to coordinate their efforts, if needed.
This model shows three crews joined as a network. The three original crewchiefs make a crew of their own, at the next higher level. Then one of them gets elected as crewchief for the whole network. This new network crewchief has a total of four 'jobs' now:
1) original crewmate
2) original crewchief
3) 2nd-level crewmate
4) 2nd-level crewchief
Red, Green, and Gold duties, relatively speaking, are for destroyers, builders, and enablers within the Crew Network.
NOTE: The job of Crewchief is a managerial collateral duty and isn't shown in these models.
An ideal Crew has only 3 Crewmates, and each of them has a job specialty called a Duty Section. Color-coded as red, green, or gold, an optimal Crew makes good use of all three Duty Sections.
With a network of three crews, the three job specialties overlap. This creates a smaller specialized network for each Duty Section, and all three support Crew Network operations.
As the Crew Network grows exponentially, so too does the available manpower for each Duty Section.
For purposes of the Crew Network, these 'Laws' and 'Rules' apply.
| Attributes of Laws | Attributes of Rules |
|---|---|
| Exist in Nature | Manmade |
| Stable equilibrium | Unstable equilibrium |
| Cannot be broken | Can and will be |
| Govern all nature | Govern other men |
| Self-regulating | Unintended consequences |