IQ data is similar to bright ultraviolet light: it can provide very good illumination (with compatible sensors) but it must be used with abundant caution. Fine-resolution IQ discrimination must result in major implications for the culture, if that discrimination is occurring. I believe it is occurring with the emerging social specialization of an emerging human hive.
In doing so, I’m satisfying my fatherly instincts by contributing to the human hive rather than to my biological offspring. Even if I had children, it is almost certain they would not have benefited as much as the unrelated people who happened to be in the right position for me to influence.
We need a new approach to governance at all scales in order to sustain and build upon our culture. I think a new approach is possible by recognizing that narratives are expendable. We do not need consistency of narratives over time, for all narratives at all scales from nations to individuals.
Success or fame in the current environment is a lottery prize given to great and weak with equal probability. In such an environment, it makes sense to put as little effort into success as one would put into buying a lottery ticket. A weekly effort, perhaps, but one that takes only a few minutes, leaving the rest of the week free.
The modern gig lifestyle results in a hive-like devaluation of the individual, but it also contributes to the emergence of more hive-like behaviors by encouraging individuals, especially men, to maximize their efforts in a gig when they are needed and minimize their obligations when they are not relevant.
To give this concept a name to contrast with MGTOW, I suggest the term MUTAW: men unable to afford women.
The existence of a charter represents good data that a group (or a couple) have expressed a commitment to cooperate together as a single person. This is strong data for influencing future policies. Part of the calculation that goes into deciding new rules is the evidence that the population will cooperate. In this case, the charters present an advantage of making the offer of committing all of its participants to cooperate with the rules. In general, it is easier to govern corporations than it is to govern individuals. Corporations have means to manage their population to assure cooperation. There are many examples of corporations making firm commitments to police their employees to conform to government regulations including regulations that impact the individual employees. The corporation itself can address disobedience without requiring any effort by the government.
