(RULE)___THE UNJUSTIFIED BURDEN AND ITS IMPLICATIONS
“Being a participant of the society, an individual must not be a burden on the society.”
What is the first thought that comes into your mind when you hear the word ‘BURDEN’?
Perhaps something hard to lift or endure. If you are asked to list the people you consider a burden, you might list all those with whom you are annoyed, or the ones with a huge amount of wealth (especially if you consider yourself a revolutionary).
But are they actually a burden?
To determine this, there is a parameter that must be considered, i.e. the Participation to burden ratio, which is the basis of the Worth level scale of the society.
Let’s start with the Web Theory of Burden and Participation.
Web Theory of burden and participation
It states that:
An ideal society has a higher/positive participation to burden ratio of its individuals, such that there is enough space to accommodate the Intrinsic and Extrinsic non-ideals, just like a web with threads of varying elasticity, so that weaker threads are supported by the stronger ones.
To efficiently grasp the whole concept, we must understand what participation actually is and how we can divide the people around us into different domains according to their participation to burden ratio.
What is participation?
It is the contribution of an individual to the very foundations of an ideal society.
Life in this world is not without its elements, and of course adequate provision is necessary to let things move forward. We, human beings, have the quality of cooperating in order to efficiently integrate different aspects of life with the main focus on the fulfilment of basic needs. These are the cooperation necessities that led to the advent of a complex relationship between individuals, giving rise to an expanded structure of mutual give and take. These absolute needs are the foundations of an ideal society. These consist of The Needs, The Environmental Stress and The Physical Stress (NEPs).
The Needs include food, shelter, clothing, organizational tasks, peace and security etc.
The Environmental Stress includes planning, natural disaster management, weather adaptation etc.
The Physical Stress includes wartime strategy, crime management, rebel engagement etc. (The difference is that the Needs cover the everyday maintenance of peace and security, while the Physical Stress covers the response when they are broken or threatened.)
The concept of Natural and Artificial Participation as well as burden is drawn from the above-defined criteria, i.e. the NEPs. Any participation related to the NEPs is Natural Participation, or simply Participation, while the contribution of an individual beyond the specified criteria is referred to as Artificial Participation or simply a surplus play. To know whether a task is Natural Participation, just ask whether the society would suffer in any of its NEPs if that task were stopped; if yes, it is Natural Participation (e.g. a farmer, a builder, a teacher, a doctor, a soldier), and if not, it is a surplus play (e.g. luxury fashion, entertainment beyond relief, speculative trading). This doesn’t mean that any other participation is lethal, but the participation to burden ratio must be maintained. In other words, Natural Participation must suffice for or override the burden to sustain the society, and if it does not, more work must be done by other individuals; this is not always problematic, but exceeding a limit creates chaos in the society, and eventually groups are formed, with every one trying to dominate at the expense of others. There are many more factors that define the ultimate fate of the society; these will be discussed while proceeding to the next considerations. Just keep on reading to get a much deeper understanding.
Burden on a society
As discussed earlier, society is another name for mutual cooperation in specific areas. There is an inherent right for an individual to extract resources from the society as per legitimate need, if he is fulfilling the requirements that are expected by the other contributors of the society. This extraction of the resources is the basis of the burden applied to the society by an individual. If the burden is in accordance with the NEPs, then this is called natural burden, while if the burden is out of line with the NEPs, then this is called artificial burden.
Participation to Burden ratio
‘It is defined as the ratio of collective participation to the whole burden applied to the society.’
There are two considerations. The first one is the Participation to Burden ratio of the society as a whole. To determine this, we consider the Natural Participation as the prime value compared with the collective burden (artificial + natural) while considering the whole society as one unit. (Both participation and burden are measured in the same unit, i.e. the net work done: participation is the work an individual contributes towards the NEPs, and burden is the work of others that he draws from the societal pool in the form of resources; this is why wealth is called a compressed form of the net work done (see RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THE WEALTH).) (In practice, participation can be measured as the hours an individual works in the NEPs, and burden as the hours of others’ work contained in what he draws from the societal pool, used at once or held, so that both are counted in the same unit. The ratio of the society as a whole can then be worked out every year from a representative sample of households, scaled up to the whole society and reported with its margin of error.) (This ratio, worked out in hours for seven societies of today, is shown with every step of its calculation in THE CURRENT STATUS OF THE SOCIETY, Part 1, at the end of this book.)
The value obtained is significant in determining the efficiency level of the society. To understand the reason as to why only natural participation is taken into account while both artificial and natural burden are the key elements, let’s examine the societal pool. There exists a pool of resources that is actually the main coordinating body that enables the steady and timely provision of the NEPs, while preventing unnecessary flooding to create the societal stratification, which in turn allows a well-organized structure of work diversification. Imagine a vast area with huge bubbles of different colours representing the diversity of participation, with a constant inward and outward flow of various relatively small bubbles through budding. This is what the societal resource pool virtually looks like. The individuals are producing small bubbles depending upon the quantity as well as the diversity of their participation. These bubbles are getting stored in the bulk, while simultaneously there is a distribution of bubbles from the reservoir among the individuals in accordance with the quantity and the type of need. It is to be noted that the reservoir must not be drained altogether. It ensures that there is stratification and work diversification in the society. Just think of it: if the whole reservoir were emptied among the individuals at once, each one would hold far more than his need, and there would be no reason left to participate in the different tasks the society requires; the positions, and the diversity of work they carry, would collapse (just like the flooding when all the gates of a dam are opened; see Draining the TAP). (In practice, the safe level of the pool can be found by tracking what flows into it (participation) and out of it (burden) year by year, and by testing bad-year scenarios to find the minimum level that keeps the NEPs safe.) There are some Guardians of this reservoir, and definitely there are rules for them to follow. This discussion is set for the section on RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THE WEALTH. By the way, coming to the reason as to why only the natural participation is mentioned in the equation while both natural and artificial burden are considered: Natural Participation is the core element in maintaining the resource pool, and just as the natural burden causes resource extraction, so does the artificial burden; or, simply, the ultimate stress is applied to the resources extracted from the natural participation, which in turn bears both types of burden, i.e. natural and artificial.
The second consideration is the Participation to Burden ratio of an individual. The equation is the same as for the Societal case, but the result interpretation is in accordance with the specific domain to which the individual belongs. At this level, the value of more concern is actually the Worth level of an individual. The Participation to burden ratio is simply to determine the exact status of the individual in the society, and that is purely for management purposes. Meanwhile, we can determine the destructiveness of an individual by making some modifications to the original formula.
NOTE: STOLEN PARTICIPATION IS ASSIGNED A NEGATIVE SIGN; THIS IS FOR STANDARDIZATION AND CALCULATION PURPOSES.
(If an individual has no Artificial Burden at all, there is nothing for this formula to measure: he is regarded as fully inside the green boundary, as destructiveness only arises where an Artificial Burden exists.)
Self Participation refers to both Natural and Artificial Participation. The reason for considering the artificial participation is that, as mentioned earlier, this participation is not lethal in all circumstances and is manageable as per the status of the society. Also, the destructiveness is more evident when the participation is low altogether rather than the isolated level of either participation, while the other prospect of resource extraction is also addressed in the formula.
Now, let us come to the point of how to interpret the obtained value of the Participation to Burden ratio with regard to the previously mentioned considerations of an individual and the society as a whole.
POSITIVE
Societal case: A value greater than zero and less than 1 shows that the society is not self-sufficient, and it can be a sign of increased corruption within the society with an oppressive system in place. It also indicates an increased level of desires of the individuals with little or no struggle to satisfy the basic needs. The worst case is when the value is falling significantly below the minimum of 1, but the resources are still more than enough. This is basically the result of inter-societal dominance with the leeching strategy of the dominant one on the weaker or oppressed one (i.e. such a society consumes more than it produces, yet lives in plenty by drawing on weaker societies). Similarly, if the value is near or equal to 1 but there is still a large deficit in the basic resources, then this can be a sign of external leeching (i.e. such a society produces enough, but its resources are drawn away by a dominant one). This can also be the case if the society is trying to meet the global artificial standards and subsequently falls victim to the hegemony of the dominant ones. Another reason can be a lack of coordination within the society that leads to either wastage or concentration of the resources. If the value is 1 or greater, then this represents the efficiency of the society. The higher the value is above 1, the more efficient it is. This allows the allocation of resources to new fields and thus is a good step towards inclusiveness in the society. An exceptionally increased value can be alarming, as this can lead to fatigue and disturb the social life of the participants. A prolonged condition can lead to chaos, a surge in criminal activities and the formation of dominating groups.
Individual case: As this value determines the destructiveness, a positive value specifies that the individual is inside the green boundary and is not a considerable threat to the society. The higher the value is above zero, the greater the probability of being inside the safe zone. An exceptionally high value can signify the ability to withstand stress and furnish capabilities. This can also be a sign of having leadership qualities.
ZERO
Societal case: This is just like a death sentence, and the demise of the society is imminent. This can be sudden if there are no openly designated slaves, and if indeed there exists such a group, then the collapse is at a relatively slow pace. Such a society undergoes internal disintegration, and there is a huge security gap with no defined set of rules. Surely, this is a collection of savage animals.
Individual case: It is possible in two scenarios: either the Self Participation and Stolen Participation are equal in magnitude or both are nil. The first case shows that the individual is on the brink and is vulnerable to becoming a destructive person sooner or later. The other case tells us that the person is in a dormant condition and can slip towards destructiveness if appropriate conditions are met.
NEGATIVE
Societal case: Not a defined value as per the formula or simply undefined.
Individual case: Only possible if Stolen Participation overrides the Self Participation. The more negative the value is, the greater the destructiveness of the individual.
Societal Domains
(In practice, individuals are placed in the domains below by applying these very definitions to their measured ratios, openly, so that anyone can check the placement.)
Ideals
The individuals that either suffice for (bear) their own burden (by tuning their participation accordingly) or participate more than the burden they apply (to the society), subsequently bearing the burden of other individuals.
[On the basis of Participation]
Normal ideals:
Those who suffice for their own burden
Worthful ideals:
Those who bear their own as well as others’ burden; these are further classified as:
1. Forced Worthful
They are forced to participate more.
2. Voluntary Worthful
They voluntarily participate more in the society.
Non-ideals
The individuals that have less participation than the burden they apply to the society (can be low, zero or negative)
Intrinsic non-ideals
They lack the natural capability to participate.
(on the basis of participation)
1. Low Participation:
Individuals with low participation with respect to the burden they apply to society,
such as old people.
2. Zero Participation:
Their Participation to Burden ratio is zero, but burden is applied to society; these include highly disabled individuals.
3. Negative Participation:
Participation Stealers / Excess burden producers, but mostly dormant, or simply preventable by effective management, and thus are not a great threat to societal organization (e.g. an individual whose mental disorder leads him to waste or damage resources, or a dependent who demands far beyond his need; they take more than their share without a deliberate plan, which is why they are mostly dormant and easily managed).
(on the basis of cause of incapability)
1. Natural Intrinsics (natural cause)
Children, old persons, the disabled from birth etc.
2. Artificial Intrinsics (artificial cause)
Lost capability later in life, such as the accidentally disabled, individuals with severe chronic diseases, individuals with mental disorders etc.
Extrinsic non-ideals
They have the natural capability but refuse to participate efficiently.
(on the basis of intention)
1. Non-Intentional (Accidental)
They do not choose to stay away from participation; rather, their circumstances have pushed them away from it (i.e. they were never guided towards their HSPs, or they lost hope after repeated failures). To understand this, let’s take an example of a young man who, after years of trying, finds no work that suits his abilities and slowly gives up; he has the capability, but not the will anymore. Such individuals can be brought back through guidance and motivation.
2. Intentional
They refuse to participate by their own choice, knowing well that the burden they apply is carried by others (e.g. a person living on inherited wealth while doing nothing for the society, or one who uses his position to take more than his share). Such individuals cannot be corrected through motivation alone; accountability is required.
(on the basis of participation)
1. Low Participation:
Individuals with low participation with respect to the burden they apply to society,
such as demotivated individuals.
2. Zero Participation:
Their participation to burden ratio is zero, but burden is applied to society, e.g. people
who inherited wealth but do not participate etc.
3. Negative Participation:
Have a negative participation to burden ratio (stolen participation is assigned a negative
sign).
The list includes:
· Individuals who habitually fulfil their evil desires
· The wealthy people who fail to fulfil the role of guardian and instead divert wealth to fulfil their own desires, with greed to extract money from people irrespective of the way they choose – even destructive or oppressive ways
· The people in public posts who want status rather than public benefit etc.
NOTE: NATURE SUSTAINS MORE WORTHFUL IDEALS THAN INTRINSIC NON-IDEALS
Most destructive persons
EXTRINSIC NON-IDEALS WITH A NEGATIVE PARTICIPATION TO BURDEN RATIO ARE THE MOST DESTRUCTIVE FORM OF NON-IDEALS
(i.e. the individuals in the list above: they have the capability, yet they not only refuse to participate but also steal the participation of others)
Today, in our society/system, there is a considerable number of these individuals. The reason is the illusion that the upper class is leveraged (i.e. that being in the upper class gives a person a real advantage over others), that the monetary system is not corrupt, that the resourceful are the ones who enjoy, that the working class dream of becoming resourceful to get rid of the difficulties they face, and that competition to win is the only way ahead.
Competition in our system is to become an extrinsic non-ideal (simple/destructive) (i.e. simple ones, with low or zero participation, who only add to the burden, and destructive ones, with negative participation, who also steal the participation of others). When such thoughts prevail in a society, evil sources begin to boom, selfishness spreads, and people are divided into groups, with each group trying to dominate at the expense of others. This system cannot provide equality. Our problem is that we want to be one of the dominant groups; we perceive it as our priority goal. Don’t be selfish; just try to overcome the problem and not be a part of it. For those individuals within the dominant group, consider that if only your associates were left on Earth, then you would compete, and groups would be formed with the same division of dominant and oppressive ones. In other words, the dominant group requires slaves. This must end to let human civilization prosper.