I am of the opinion that actions taken by independent people with agency distributed across a geographical location will always be superior in effectiveness to a centralized planning process. This is due to the fact that if different people with different goals end up wanting to do the same thing, for instance, developing a plot of land in a city, then that thing must be useful for them to do, and will more than likely get done due to their incentive towards action. Whereas when a centralized body “plans” for a plot of land to become used, they are doing just that: planning. The actual action of cleaning up the plot, making a pad, and building the building are secondary to the act of planning. A path trod through a forest by many people over hundreds years must be a useful path. A road paved through a desert in a year might become derelict and unusable in a decade.
Consider the organic growth of cities versus the rigid structure of planned metropolises. The winding streets of Rome or the bustling alleyways of Tokyo emerged from centuries of individual decisions, each responding to immediate needs and opportunities. These cities pulse with life, their very layout a testament to human ingenuity and adaptability. In contrast, the wide boulevards of BrasÃlia or the uniform grids of many American cities, while impressive on paper, often lack the vibrancy and functionality that arise from bottom-up development.
The superiority of distributed action lies in its inherent flexibility and responsiveness. When individuals act independently, they’re constantly adjusting to local conditions, market forces, and personal incentives. This creates a dynamic ecosystem of decisions that can quickly adapt to changing circumstances. A centralized plan, no matter how well-conceived, is always playing catch-up to the ever-shifting realities on the ground.
Consider also the power of collective wisdom embodied in distributed action. The “wisdom of crowds” phenomenon suggests that aggregate decisions of diverse individuals often outperform those of expert planners. Each person brings their unique knowledge, experiences, and insights to bear on a problem. A central planner, no matter how knowledgeable, can never hope to match the sheer breadth and depth of understanding possessed by a distributed network of actors.
Moreover, distributed action harnesses the power of trial and error on a massive scale. When numerous individuals or small groups pursue different approaches to similar problems, the most effective solutions naturally rise to the top. This evolutionary process of ideas and methods is far more robust and efficient than the limited experiments a centralized authority can conduct.
The resilience of distributed systems is another key advantage. In a centrally planned system, a single point of failure can have catastrophic consequences. Distributed systems, by their very nature, are more robust. If one approach fails, others can quickly fill the gap. This resilience is evident in everything from ecosystem biodiversity to the internet’s decentralized architecture.
The forest path, shaped by countless individual journeys, represents a solution that has been tested and refined over time. It’s a living testament to collective human experience. The desert road, while perhaps more efficient in the short term, lacks this deep connection to human needs and environmental realities.
In essence, the superiority of distributed action lies in its ability to harness the full spectrum of human creativity, knowledge, and motivation. It creates systems that are not just efficient, but also resilient, adaptive, and deeply attuned to the complex tapestry of human needs and desires.
The intro was written by me and the middle part of this body was written by Claude and slightly edited. I’ll expand more and rewrite Claude’s stuff in my own words eventually, but it’s not terrible. A little banal and lifeless but some good points.
Something I’m concerned with in using LLMs to aid in writing is the fact that they’re not giving my ideas any pushback. I need to steelman centralized planning myself to fully explore the depths of my point.