Staving off the collapse of Western civilisation: A personal introduction to the CAMS/CAN model
Oct 14, 2024As a transsexual woman driven by a deep curiosity about the flow of events, the past few years have been especially challenging. Nonetheless, I rose to the task, guided by the principle that truth must be defended. During this time, I have written 30 essays that meet high editorial standards, along with at least as many that remain as “personal notes.”
I began writing for Pearls and Irritations, initially to argue against the war in Ukraine. Over time, my work expanded to broader topics, such as the rise of China, the evident decline of the West, and the urgent necessity of transitioning swiftly to sustainable technologies.
My approach is grounded in the Western tradition of rational debate. I rely on established facts derived through scientific methods, using evidence-based premises to develop arguments that can inform policy.
What began as a lifelong interest in the rise and fall of great powers has, particularly since the onset of the war, evolved into a broader inquiry into global power dynamics.
Defending a balanced perspective on China has become increasingly difficult in a media landscape often hostile to dissent. The war in Ukraine further exposed the suppression of alternative narratives and the rise of a bombastic Western discourse that stifles critical thought.
I have always believed in the unity of knowledge and see my role as offering loyal, constructive criticism of dominant narratives through evidence-based critique. One troubling trend I’ve observed is the irrational behaviour of elites, who have consistently proven either unwilling or unable to address clear existential threats. Exceptionalism, ideological rigidity, and a tendency toward militarism are recurring themes in my work.
Increasingly, I’ve turned to AI platforms to pressure-test my ideas and refine my analysis. AI has proven invaluable in expanding the scope of my research, allowing me to test the limits of its capacity to engage in productive debate.
As a transsexual woman, I understand the pressures of navigating entrenched social norms. Being different has given me a unique vantage point from which to critique the distortions and delusions of those in power. It has motivated me to expose contradictions, challenge flawed assumptions, and propose rational solutions.
In today’s world, the task of the “public intellectual” is no longer defined by grand mythologies or religious traditions, but by the need to confront the realities of global power and human complexity rationally.
In a landscape dominated by material competition and resource scarcity, understanding our fractured, rapidly changing world is imperative. This requires a commitment to reason, debate, and the courage to dissent when necessary. In a world fragmented by competing nationalisms, economic interests, and increasingly polarised ideologies, sharp, rational analysis is essential.
My intellectual and personal journey is part of this larger task. By rigorously examining geopolitical dynamics, power structures, and the human condition, I aim to contribute to a new, rational framework for understanding the world. I also hope to restore or renew the creative imagination that has historically driven human progress.
As a retired public servant, free to speak my mind, I feel a responsibility to dissent on behalf of those silenced by societal pressures to conform. My essays give voice to those who cannot speak freely.
In studying geopolitics and history, I have come to see patterns – patterns that not only explain past events, but also forecast future outcomes. While I have occasionally speculated for practical gain, my true passion lies in science fiction, logical systems, and paradigms that illuminate the world in new ways.
I value enlightenment above all. I once told the universe not to hand me fame, wealth, power, or even a respectable place in the academy if it came at the cost of dogma or hypocrisy. I have enjoyed freedom – the freedom to pursue knowledge in my own way and at my own pace. Fortunately, I have rarely been tempted to abandon this path.
As a teenager, I was captivated by the ideas in Asimov’s Foundation novels. Today, more than half a century later, I see myself as a Seldon-like figure, striving to stave off the collapse of Western civilisation.
Had you asked me last week whether I was content with this path, I might have expressed doubt. But this week, I’ve come to believe the journey has been worth it.
I believe I’ve made an important discovery – or rather, formalised a common intuition by explaining its underlying mechanism.
Since ancient times, humans have speculated that modern life forms evolved from more primitive ones – a concept that predates Darwin. Charles Darwin is famous for explaining the mechanism: evolution by natural selection. That paradigm, once understood, sparked a scientific revolution.
I believe I have formulated a framework that applies evolution by selection to societies – a mechanism that explains the rise and fall of empires in terms of the genotypes and phenotypes of human culture. I believe I have established a foundational understanding of how societies are born, reproduce, and die, along with the illnesses and pathologies they suffer.
I call this the theory of the Complex Dynamic State, and my model, which explains the mechanism, is called CAMS-CAN.
Abstract of the CAMS/CAN model
In a world where the rise and fall of civilisations shape the course of human history, understanding the underlying forces at work is critical. The complexity of societal evolution, geopolitical shifts, and the resilience or collapse of states demands a framework capable of explaining these dynamics with precision and foresight. My model, the Common Adaptive Model State (CAMS), paired with the Catch-All Network (CAN), provides such a framework. It is designed to analyse how societies adapt, compete, and either thrive or decline over time.
At its core, the CAMS-CAN model seeks to explain the internal and external dynamics that drive societal evolution. The Common Adaptive Model State represents the fundamental structures, institutions, and ideologies that define a society. This model encapsulates how societies organise themselves in response to their environment, resource pressures, technological innovations, and interactions with other states. CAMS reflects the baseline adaptive strategies that societies employ to maintain stability and project power.
The Catch-All Network, in contrast, represents the broader cultural, ideological, and systemic networks that link societies to one another. It captures the flow of ideas, trade, technology, and influence across borders, acting as the connective tissue that determines how societies affect and are affected by their global peers. CAN is particularly useful for understanding how external pressures — whether economic, geopolitical, or ideological — shape the internal dynamics of societies and vice versa.
The interaction between CAMS and CAN is crucial to understanding how societies either succeed in adapting to changing circumstances or fail and collapse. CAMS represents a society’s internal adaptive mechanisms, while CAN demonstrates how external influences impact these mechanisms. Together, they form a dynamic system capable of explaining the trajectories of civilisations, both historically and in the modern era.
A key element of the CAMS-CAN model is its capacity to highlight patterns that explain why certain societies adapt successfully while others falter. Societies with a flexible and responsive CAMS — one capable of evolving institutional structures, governance systems, and cultural values — are better positioned to navigate periods of crisis and change. Conversely, societies whose CAMS become rigid or maladaptive are more prone to collapse, especially when external pressures from the CAN become overwhelming.
One of the unique contributions of this model is its ability to account for the feedback loops between CAMS and CAN. The model demonstrates that internal adaptation within a society (CAMS) is not only a response to external conditions (CAN), but also actively reshapes those conditions. For example, a society that develops a cutting-edge technological innovation might not only improve its own adaptive capacity, but also transform the broader CAN by exporting that innovation to other states. This interaction creates a cyclical process of mutual influence, where the adaptive success or failure of one society reverberates through the entire global system.
CAMS-CAN also helps us understand why, in today’s interconnected world, societies cannot be viewed in isolation. The networked nature of modern geopolitics, trade, technology, and communication means that shifts in one region can have ripple effects on societies across the globe. CAN captures this interconnectedness, providing a lens through which to analyse how global influences—from economic downturns to ideological shifts—impact the internal stability and adaptability of individual societies (CAMS).
Historical case studies:
The model is particularly powerful when applied to historical case studies. For instance, the fall of the Roman Empire can be explained as a collapse in the Roman CAMS – where rigid institutions, overextension of resources, and internal corruption made the empire unable to adapt to external pressures. The simultaneous transformation of the CAN — marked by the rise of new trade routes, competing powers, and the spread of Christianity — further hastened Rome’s decline. Similarly, the rapid ascent of the United States as a global superpower in the 20th century can be seen through the lens of a highly adaptive CAMS, capable of internal innovation, flexible governance, and economic expansion, combined with a CAN that favoured the spread of American cultural and economic influence across the globe.
In the contemporary era, the CAMS-CAN model provides a robust tool for analysing geopolitical trends. The rise of China, for instance, can be understood as the development of a highly adaptive CAMS, where state-driven innovation and economic reforms have enabled the country to capitalise on global (CAN) opportunities. Simultaneously, China has reshaped the CAN by expanding its influence through trade, technology, and infrastructure projects like the Belt and Road Initiative. Conversely, many Western democracies are experiencing a weakening of their CAMS due to political polarisation, economic stagnation, and institutional rigidity, which makes it difficult for them to respond effectively to global (CAN) challenges.
Future implications:
The CAMS-CAN model also has predictive power. By analysing the adaptive capacity of societies through their CAMS, and understanding how they are situated within the broader global network (CAN), we can make educated forecasts about which societies are likely to thrive or falter in the face of emerging challenges. These challenges include technological disruption, climate change, and shifting power dynamics in the global order. The model provides a framework for understanding how societies must adapt their internal structures and values to navigate these challenges, while also shaping — and being shaped by — the broader global system.
Conclusion:
The CAMS-CAN model offers a vital framework for understanding the complex and dynamic nature of societal evolution. It moves beyond traditional political or economic analyses by incorporating adaptive systems theory, emphasising the importance of both internal societal flexibility (CAMS) and external network influences (CAN). This framework allows us to analyse past events with greater clarity and offers predictive insights into future global dynamics. As the world faces unprecedented challenges — from climate change to geopolitical upheaval — CAMS-CAN provides a critical tool for scholars, policymakers, and public intellectuals alike to better understand and navigate the rapidly changing global landscape.
For a comprehensive exploration of the CAMS-CAN model, including its detailed mechanisms, historical case studies, and its implications for contemporary geopolitics, I invite you to read the full paper.