The culture wars can be framed using various dichotomies:
- Capitalism vs Socialism
- Strict Father vs Nurturant Parent
- Left Brain vs Right Brain
- Middle Brain vs Upper Brain
- Conservatives vs Liberals
- MAGA vs DEI
- Old Testament vs New Testament
I’m sure there are other such dichotomies out there, but I think you get the picture. Regardless of the dichotomy you prefer, it behooves us to know what this—as Dinesh D’Souza puts it[1]—“New Civil Cold War” is all about. Is it really as simple as Capitalism vs Socialism? Trust me, I’m not a history nor politics expert by any stretch, but stretch I must to get to a possible answer. Come along as I play Parsifal, the holy fool.
A bit of a backstory. Recently my old alma mater UT Dallas changed the name of the Geosciences Department to Sustainable Earth Systems Sciences Department. Frankly, this shocked me, as it did some of my geology colleagues. As a result, I started a deep dive to try to figure out what would trigger such a massive change. Spoiler alert: it was the embrace of DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) and the desire to attract DEI-minded students. Yes, I took it personally, that my identity as a geologist, as a scientist, was being undermined through this “rebranding.” Let me trace out my journey, the journey of a holy fool.
Once it became clear that what we are looking at here is capitalism vs socialism, I figured I’d read up on both. Here are the books I read (in no particular order):
- The Hidden History of the The American Dream by Thom Hartmann
- The Hidden History of Democracy by Thom Hartman
- The Hidden History of Neoliberalism by Thom Hartman
- Exploitation as Domination—What Makes Capitalism Unjust by Nicholas Vrousalis
- Socialism 101 by Kathleen Sears
- Multisolving by Elizabeth Sawin
- United States of Socialism by Dinesh D’Souza
I’m sure there are dozens more books I could have read, but these titles have given me enough of a “fuzzy picture” (as philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein calls it) that I think I’m good. Now, I chose to read Multisolving by Elizabeth Sawin simply to get information on systems theory—a research interest of mine—however, it ended up being an interesting take on socialist thought. And I fault myself for not recognizing this sooner because Multisolving sucked me in as a general book on systems thinking until I realized that it was a book on what Gerald Midgley calls “wave three systems thinking,” which is focused on emancipation and has very little to do with my research interest: organic systems thinking (wave one). And, silly me, my first book Bowlby’s Battle contains an executive summary of Midgley’s 2000 book entitled Systemic Intervention: Philosophy, Methodology, and Practice. I should have picked up on this quicker.
Reading Multisolving was actually a great exercise because it demonstrates how easily it is to start into a book thinking you will encounter unbiased and balanced science only to find a hidden agenda of, say, capitalism or socialism. Equally, students may start a program of study in a Sustainable Earth Systems Sciences Department thinking they are going to learn about science and its methods only to discover that there is a hidden agenda: socialism. Thus my desire to bring this all out in the open so we can become educated consumers. Thus my desire to draw attention to the Culture Wars and what is fueling them.
I like metaphors, analogies, and models because they allow me to make sense of complex ideas and processes. So, before we get started, here are a few that may make it easier for the reader to understand or grasp what is going on.
Mini Bike
As a kid I was fortunate enough to have a mini bike. I was rather inquisitive and would often take things apart to see how they worked. One day I took the cooling shroud off of the Briggs and Stratton engine on my mini bike. Underneath I found a flywheel that had turbine-looking fins on it. I asked my dad what those fins were for. He replied that they serve two purposes: 1) they provided cooling for the engine as the B&S engine was air-cooled, and, 2) they provided air flow for the governor. “What’s a governor?” I asked. My dad explained that as the engine spins at greater RPMs (revolutions per minute), the cooling fins generate more airflow that both cools the engine and are captured by the “sail” of the governor. As the sail is pushed back, it pulls on the connecting rod to the carburetor, which, in turn keeps the engine from exceeding a certain RPM. “Why is that important?” I asked. My dad replied that without the governor, the engine might spin at an RPM that could damage the engine, such as damage to the piston or connecting rod. “It’s for your safety son,” my father told me earnestly as his energy for kid explanations had reached its limit.
Now, allow me to anthropomorphize this story, not unlike how the rock band Rush anthropomorphized the trees in their song The Trees.[2] In our mini bike story, the engine is capitalism. It’s the engine. It’s what makes things run, to move forward. The governor is socialism wishing to keep the engine in check, to keep everything safe. In truth, the governor wishes that it could be the engine. In truth, the engine wishes that the governor would simply go away.
Side story: once I knew what the governor did, yes, I did find a way to reach down and bypass the action of the governor. I would on occasion run that B&S engine flat out. It was exhilarating; it was dangerous. Most times I just let the governor do its thing.
Prisoner’s Dilemma
The real Prisoner’s Dilemma derives from game theory. I get game theory, sort of, but I’m no expert. Here I will tell you my version of the Prisoner’s Dilemma. For the real version and its history, I recommend William Poundstone’s 2010 book entitled Prisoner’s Dilemma.
Say, I’m in prison and I hatch a great escape plan. I am immediately confronted with a dilemma: do I keep the plan to myself and execute it alone, or do I share the plan with others and solicit their help? The former is much more safe because there’s no possibility others will turn me in to the warden. However, I may not have enough manpower to execute the plan. The latter plan gives me the manpower I need, but there’s the risk that one of my co-conspirators could turn me in potentially gaining concessions from the warden. What is one to do?
Game theory and associated computer simulations have been used to figure out what is the best course of action when confronted with the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Game theory is also used to evaluate “first strike” scenarios, that is to say, what keeps a nuclear power from engaging in a first strike against another country. Is it the possibility of “mutually assured destruction” or something else? The Prisoner’s Dilemma encourages us to look at where two possible dilemmas and two possible solutions are located: the former puts the dilemma and solution within the individual; the latter puts the dilemma and solution within the group, or, as we will see below, in society. This takes us to the work of cognitive scientist turned political commentator George Lakoff.
Strict Father vs Nurturant Parent
I have talked about these two frames from Lakoff’s work before, so I’ll be brief here. One of the main features of the Strict Father frame is where it puts societal problems and their solutions: within the individual. In contrast, the Nurturant Parent frame puts societal problems and their solutions within the societal milieu. I would suggest that capitalists are by and large Strict Fathers who put societal problems and their solutions within the individual. In contrast, I would suggest that socialists are generally Nurturant Parents who put societal problems and their solutions within the societal milieu. Strict Fathers see problems as arising from “personal failings.” Nurturant Parents see problems as arising from “societal failings.” Now, there’s an extension to all of this.
As Lakoff points out in his work, Strict Fathers abhor “freeloading” or living off the fat of the land. Strict Fathers feel that in order for society to work smoothly, all forms of freeloading must be eliminated. There’s no tolerance for freeloading. In contrast, Nurturant Parents recognize that by putting societal problems in the societal milieu, they are willing to tolerate a certain degree of freeloading off of their largess. Nurturant Parents accept that freeloading is the price to be paid for a socialist society. Capitalists do not tolerate freeloading; socialists do. A Strict Father in the Prisoner’s Dilemma will not accept the possibility that a co-conspirator may turn snitch and potentially gain concessions from the warden. Nuturant Parents are willing to take on the risk of freeloading comforted by the belief that even among thieves there is honor. This idea of trust will come up again because it’s one that descriptions of capitalism (the one’s I have read) seem to overlook.
Neurobiology
Believe it or not, there may be brain explanations for all of this. In his work, Lakoff briefly mentions the possibility that the brains of Strict Fathers (capitalists) are structurally different from the brains of Nurturant Parents (socialists). Apparently there is some neuroimaging data that, while not conclusive, is enticing. However, let’s look at Paul MacLean’s triune brain model. Once again, I have covered this model at length elsewhere, so I’ll be brief.
MacLean’s model holds that the brain is comprised of three main layers:
- upper—Executive brain
- middle—limbic or emotional brain
- lower—reptilian brain
Spoiler alert: the middle brain is the capitalist, Strict brain; while the upper brain is the socialist, Nurturant brain. Allow me to explain.
Now, I’m going to commit an egregious scientific research error and provide you with data without a concrete reference. I think it’s from Elkhonon Goldberg’s work but don’t quote me. What caught my attention while reading neurobiological texts is the observation that the upper brain does not do anything. What? How is this possible? The upper brain is home to the Executive Functions like empathy, mental time travel, focusing attention, cognitive modeling, etc. How can you say that nothing is going on? The answer: The upper brain apparently has no direct connections to the outside world. All of the material or data the Executive brain needs to do its work comes from the interactions the middle and lower brains have with the outside world. Think about it.
My dog may have very little Executive Functioning, however, she gets along well in the so-called outer world. Yes, you can get along quite nicely without Executive Functioning. As a matter of fact, Executive Function and ADHD expert Russell Barkley tells us (through his very popular YouTube videos) that if he had his druthers, he would rename ADHD (attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder) Executive Function Deficit Disorder. Simply, persons suffering from ADHD have difficulty accessing and making use of EF skills. They have difficulty using the metacognitive resources (e.g., “thinking about thinking” or personal reflection) afforded by the upper brain. However, they get along fine for the most part.
To his credit, Barkley spends considerable time on his YouTube channel providing solutions for ADHD sufferers (and their caregivers) who wish to properly navigate more complex and conceptually rich environments like college, or work, or even human relationships. Unfortunately, some people who have ADHD have difficulties arising from the fact that they do not have access to a properly functioning “governor.” As a result they run their engine flat out. And this can take on a literal sense. Barkley openly talks about how his brother, who suffered from ADHD, was killed in a car crash. Apparently risk-taking behavior is not uncommon among people who have been diagnosed with ADHD. So, back to my mini bike model.
The upper brain governor has nothing to do unless the middle brain engine is running. No engine, no need for a governor. No middle brain navigating the environment, no need for an upper brain providing regulation. And, yes, as we will see, capitalists argue that if there wasn’t a capitalist engine getting things done, moving things along, there would be nothing for the socialist governor to, well, govern. Truth be known, the middle brain can get along without the upper brain. It may run flat out and sustain damage, but it will get things done in the short run. Looked at from this perspective, the upper brain is rather parasitic, even, dare I say, a freeloader.
The Lower Brain—Lubrication
Before we move on to the capitalism vs socialism debate proper, I’d like to come back to this idea of trust. One thing I learned about the engine powering my mini bike is it needs oil in the crankcase in order for it to run. No oil and the engine will seize. I’d like to propose that oil or any lubricant be looked at as the lower reptilian brain. No lower brain and the middle brain engine will not go or do anything, and the upper brain governor will have nothing to, well, govern. This is why neurobiologist Antonio Damasio in is work will often talk about levels of consciousness:
- core self = lower brain
- biographical self = middle brain
- extended self = upper brain
Neurobiologist Elkhonon Goldberg (mentioned above) presents a similar model in his work:
- continuity = lower brain
- content = middle brain
- concept = upper brain
Trust me, we enjoy that the lower brain maintains “organic continuity” and our “core self” while we are under anesthesia during surgery or getting a colonoscopy. Let me tell you a story of the lower brain and the trust it can facilitate.
The Knights Templar—The Beginnings of Banking and Hospital Care
I’m pulling this information mostly from my read of Jim Marr’s 2001 book entitled Rule By Secrecy, although I will pull quotes from the Wikipedia entry for Knights Templar.
The Wikipedia entry for Knights Templar tells us that the Templars formed a “French military order of the Catholic faith, and one of the wealthiest and most popular military orders in Western Christianity.” The entry continues, “They were founded in 1118 to defend pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem [the Crusades], with their headquarters located there on the Temple Mount, and existed for nearly two centuries during the Middle Ages.” Suffice it to say that the journey from Europe to Jerusalem was a long and arduous endeavor. The Templars were faced with two problems: 1) How to keep travelers safe from predation by robbers, and, 2) How to keep travelers healthy during their months-long trek. They solved the first by in effect developing what we now know as the “checking system.” Travelers would deposit a sum of gold at their starting point, and then when they arrived safely in Jerusalem they would present a piece of paper (a check) and receive their gold back, probably with a “processing fee.” In this way travelers could travel in relative safety. Not to get too cheeky but maybe the Templars’ slogan was, “CrusadeExpress … Never start your journey without it.”
The second problem was solved by setting up a system of hospitality houses or infirmaries in conjunction with the order of the Knights Hospitaller. This was the beginning of what we now know as our system of hospitals. The point being that travelers would not be so willing to make a journey to the Holy Land without the safety provided by a checking system as well as the health care provided by a hospital system. These safety systems provided the lubrication that the Crusade engine needed. The governor? That would be the Catholic Church of course. The Crusades ultimately failed. However, to operate or run they needed a safety system, an engine system, and a governor system: lower brain, middle brain, upper brain. And we are the beneficiaries of those long-ago Trust & Safety Systems of banking and health care or hospitality.
Trust and Safety Systems Today
Today, we are surrounded by numerous Trust & Safety Systems. I have never used an Uber but it is my understanding that there is a rating system for both the driver and the passenger. Trust & Safety System.
It’s a long story—one you can find in the booklet entitled On Being a Scientist—Responsible Conduct in Research (1995)—however, in the early days of scientific research (the 1700s) it was common for scientists to steal ideas from their fellow scientists and claim them as their own. This form of predation kept scientists from embarking on their own scientific journeys. Or if they did, they conducted their research in seclusion and secrecy (not unlike the prisoner who keeps his/her escape plan a secret). This distrust and predation prevented scientific discoveries from benefitting society. The solution: the scientific citation economy. Trust & Safety System.
How about the bond rating system in the investment world? Trust & Safety System. Rating your Amazon purchases (which Alexa annoyingly wants me to do all the time)? Trust & Safety System.
I did a one-semester stint in an MBA program and learned that the business world could not properly function without trust. Period. So when the loan obligation industry got drunk in 2008, threw off the SEC (securities exchange commission) governor, and ran flat out, individuals, corporations, and entire countries suffered great damage. We felt aftershocks of this 2008 housing bust when in 2023 Silicon Valley Bank failed. I guess banking types just cannot resist overriding the governor and running their mini bikes flat out. Exhilarating! Dangerous!
How about the biggest Trust & Safety System of them all: your credit score. One’s entire life could rise or fall based on one’s credit score. Another thing I learned in my MBA accounting course: companies will often have a ledger entry for such intangibles as “good will” and “brand value.” You mess with those intangibles and the very lifeblood of a company could drain out as Boeing is going through currently. Good will, brand value, and brand loyalty form an incredibly powerful Trust & Safety System.
This probably is a good place to look at the capitalism vs socialism debate proper, which we will do in Part 2. I’m going to be as unbiased as I possibly can. I agree with Lakoff when he says that there is no right or wrong frame or cultural model; they just are. Let me say that—pulling from the model of organic systems theory—you cannot have an overall working system without a Trust & Safety System level (lower brain), an Engine level (middle brain), and a Governor level (upper brain). When this overall organic system as it were, gets out of balance (e.g., during the 2008 housing bust), there could be damage. So, there really cannot be a Capitalism vs Socialism debate because it overlooks the Trust & Safety System level. Kill the lower, continuity level, the others go away. See you in Part 2.
Notes:
[1] – From his 2020 book entitled United States of Socialism: Who’s Behind It, Why It’s Evil, How to Stop It.
[2] – Lyrics from The Trees by Rush:
There is unrest in the forest Trouble with the trees For the maples want more sunlight And the oaks ignore their pleas
