Virtuous circles that change the world, and three questions to help us tame them

Many things that happen in politics are reactionary. An economy fails, the government loses an election. A regime falls, their ideology is discarded. Generally, some event happens that triggers or catalyses a political change.

But once in a while, events unleash a change that is somehow able to act as its own catalyst. Like a tear in the fabric of political space-time, its cumulative impact either keeps it on track and deflects attempts to resist it, or causes it to grow ever wider.

These are called virtuous circles — or vicious, if you’re in their path. They’re kind of a big deal. And if we learn to see them, they can help us make decisions that will influence our world.

In a previous piece, I talked about the rise of the 16th century merchant class, whose demands for fairer representation precipitated modern parliamentary democracy. That piece was inspired by a book, Why Nations Fail. The authors suggest a virtuous circle explains the gradual creep towards pluralism. Once citizens were granted additional rights, they felt empowered to demand more — and were better equipped to seize them.

Similar circles pepper our history. Take, for example, the rise of the corporation. Since the early chartered companies of the 1600s, the idea of a non-human entity representing the financial interests of a group of people has continually grown in scope.

Beginning as a royally-granted charter, wholly subservient to the crown and the state, the corporation has ceaselessly pushed the boundaries of its rights. In their modern incarnation, through free trade deals, they’re obtaining the ability to sue governments for losses caused by regulation. In some ways, the rights of corporations now outrank the rights of sovereign states.

So what makes some ideas expand once unleashed upon the world?

In nature, change happens when there’s a surplus of something in one place and a deficit in another. Imagine smoke diffusing in a room, hot water mixing in a bath, or wind blowing from regions of high to low pressure.

For our virtuous circles, this concentration gradient is often the domain of potential rights or capabilities. These could be human rights, corporate rights, political enfranchisement, income equality, or the freedom to marry your partner.

When rights are not uniformly applied — when others possess rights that you’re denied — the system exists in a state of potential energy. The higher the differential, the more energy is there. When gay marriage is legal in one state but not another, the injustice is obvious. When it’s legal in all states but a few, something has to give.

If we think about circles in this way, we can begin to plot the course of history — or at least place a few bets. First, think of an area where people are unequally restricted in what they can do. How about US cannabis prohibition? Based on where you live, the effects of smoking weed may vary from mild inebriation to a mandatory prison sentence.

But with weed now legal in several US states, it’s harder for lawmakers to argue that prohibition is the way forward. And with evidence from legal states pointing to reductions in both crime and drug-related harm, the same lawmakers feel less pressure to appear “tough”.

Based on this knowledge, a savvy investor could bet that weed-related companies are going to do well. And they are, in droves; there’s even a category in AngelList. And this isn’t just passive profiteering. Through investing, financiers support these additional rights, building tangible structures that lock them in place.

Many of us have goals that align with virtuous circles. A company might support net neutrality laws; a politician might be pushing for broader human rights. You may be in a position to advance your own cause through helping a circle expand.

To do this, you should identify the ideal next change the circle could make, then help push to make it happen. But in complex situations, it may not be obvious what that is. With limited resources, your choice really matters — you can’t afford to spread yourself thin.

When figuring out the best way to move things forward, there are three important questions to ask:

• Will this change grant me additional capabilities that make attaining the next change easier?
• Will this change reduce the stake my opponent has in trying to defeat me?
• Will this change make it more difficult to roll back my progress?

It turns out these three questions underlie some other big ideas: think Silicon Valley’s cycle of “disruption”, and the “ask forgiveness, not permission” approach to getting stuff done. You can see their echoes in how Airbnb has upset the hotel market, or how Uber is steamrolling the cab industry. They’re a recipe for change.

If you find yourself opposing a vicious circle, the same works in reverse. What action will prevent your opponents gaining additional rights, reducing your motivation and protecting the progress they have made? Find out, and make it happen.

This is relevant whether fighting political corruption, extremism, or the spread of a competing business model. It’s how the hotel industry is fighting Airbnb by casting subletting as immoral, or how Spotify pulled the plug on illegal MP3s by making streaming easier than BitTorrent.

Self-fulfilling change is powerful magic, and can be a force for progress or regression. Once we figure out how to use it, we can make things happen — and defend ourselves from changes that we’d rather not see.

If you’d like to share your thoughts, find me on Twitter.