System Change on Steroids: From Checks and Balances to an Authoritarian Government. Part 2
Systems change requires a transition of power. However, this is not a task one can achieve alone; you need allies willing to help. The challenge for those who resist change is to maintain a clear sight of what is happening, a map that depicts the routes and shortcuts those clinging to power unlawfully are following, to anticipate and prevent them from causing too much damage.
I'm aware of the ambiguity in this statement because, depending on which side of power you occupy, you may perceive others' actions as "unlawful". However, laws and regulations can help differentiate what is genuinely unlawful from what is not.
What I propose today is a framework to map the exercise of power, identifying the reinforcing feedback structures that enable people to access and maintain positions of power. Trump and his allies serve as an excellent example to illustrate how meta-causal loop diagrams can be used to understand power dynamics, as their sense of impunity leads them to openly display their reckless interventions without showing consideration for the brutal consequences of their actions.
Causal and metacausal loop diagrams
Jay Forrester was a computer engineer and systems scientist who developed the field of Systems Dynamics, which uses computer simulations to understand complex systems. This was mind-blowing in the 1960s.
To create these computer simulations, one first develops a conceptual map depicting the relationships between the elements under study. This provides the logical foundation of the simulation, though without numerical values. These causal loop diagrams capture the assumptions, mental models and understanding of all those involved in the analysis, giving a rock-solid foundation for the simulation model.
This approach is quite brilliant. However, its conceptual and mathematical strength simultaneously serves as its limitation. Causal loop diagrams offer a quantitative description of reality, focusing on measuring the level of influence that one factor exerts over others. I found this framework rather restrictive when attempting to describe the nuances of human relationships.
A couple of years ago, whilst working with peacebuilding researchers to map conflicts, I developed my own version of causal loop diagrams. My adaptation integrates people directly into the maps to reveal the underlying incentives and loyalty networks within complex human interactions. I ultimately created a flexible conceptual framework capable of capturing these human-factor interactions, which, I believe, offers a better approach to understanding not only the complexity of a situation but also how these conditions influence people's behaviour.
Basic data model
This is the basic data model of the Meta-Causal Loop Diagram. It shows the fundamental components: two elements, actors and factors, and five pairs of complementary relationships. With these components, you can map infinite complexity, or you can be sensible and use them with care.
You can apply this mapping approach to help you make any kind of decisions where people are involved, from your personal life to your business strategy. I strongly recommend you follow the "minimum amount of information to move forward" approach when you map. Mapping is exciting because it helps you to order your own thinking in the first place, but if you try to take in all the information at once, you'll quickly become overwhelmed, and the map stops being useful.
The idea of the data model at its most fundamental level is that people act because it benefits them. This is the basic motivation behind any action. However, there could be a situation where Actor #1 may possess authority or influence over Actor #2 and force or convince Actor #2 to perform something that benefits Actor #1. Simultaneously, Actor #2 can cooperate with Actor #3 to undertake something that damages Actor #1. At this point, we have enough pot to make a spy film.
What I'm attempting to demonstrate with this straightforward example is that with the meta-causal loop diagram approach, you can illustrate evidence of how actors behave, their incentives for doing so, and the implications for the rest of the network. It can also help you anticipate which dynamics might activate other people in the network to cooperate, either to resist or to support other actors' behaviour. Let’s use the relationship between Trump and Elon Musk as an example.
“The sting”
This is a map that shows the intricate relationship to coordinate a massive scam in the US.
In his first term in the White House, Donald Trump appointed three conservative judges to the Supreme Court, changing the ideological balance in his favour (an actor who does something that benefits him).
During the presidential campaign, Elon Musk poured £291 million into the Conservatives, which led to the election of Trump for his second term. Trump, using his authority as the new president, appointed Elon Musk as a Special Government Employee, which allows Musk to avoid the obvious conflicts of interest he incurs as the head of DOGE and CEO of Tesla, Starlink and SpaceX. (An actor has an influence on another actor who does something that benefits him.)
As head of DOGE, Elon Musk is using his new influence on federal contracts and spending to fund and reassign defence contracts to his companies, Starlink and SpaceX. This will provide him with billions of dollars, whilst eliminating competitors to position his companies in direct line to be awarded future contracts. (An actor who does something that benefits him and damages other actors that, potentially, could cooperate to resist.)
Additionally, Musk is dismantling independent agencies such as the National Labour Relations Board and the Securities and Exchange Commission, which have active, ongoing cases against Musk's companies for unlawful firings and securities violations. These cases could lead to millions of dollars in penalties if successful. This dismantling reduces the capacity of these agencies to investigate him, and simultaneously reduces the oversight and enforcement capacity over Trump's executive branch. (An actor who does something that benefits him and another actor who has authority over him, and damages other actors that, potentially, could cooperate to resist.)
This represents merely a small sample of the Trump administration's attempts to manipulate the United States' political system for their own advantage and that of their political allies. As Representative Melanie Stansbury stated, this is a scam, if I may say so, one of global proportions.
Mapping systems’ incentives and power dynamics
From a system mapping perspective, I hope I've demonstrated how this straightforward data model can help depict, synthesise and visualise complex relationships, enabling a better understanding of potential impacts and the incentives driving actors to either promote or resist certain dynamics.
As I mentioned in Part 1 of this article, from the dynamics created by this power structure emerge incentives for other actors to participate in favour of or against the Trumps-Musk tandem in the US and internationally.
A potential way of preventing Trump's administration from transforming the checks and balances system into a Putin-style authoritarian system is to reduce or remove his sources of power.
The first source of power is his fan base of loyal followers. Some of Trump's executive orders targeted TikTok, gender, diversity, immigration, free speech, and restoring names that honour American greatness, among others. These actions aligned with his followers' shared ideology and reinforced their support. However, as his followers begin to feel the impact of tariffs and reductions in healthcare and social services, it is possible this support may turn into resistance.
Another source of power is the support of corporations and wealthy donors who benefit from the removal or reduction of regulatory and environmental policies and the protectionism that trade tariffs create. This strategy can boost the development of domestic production and the reshoring of manufacturing activities. However, the trade war is eroding long-standing trade relationships with US allies, a situation that Chinese diplomacy is taking advantage of to create new commercial allies. This can disrupt Trump's long-term commercial strategy, weakening his financial support.
From the formal authority perspective, Conservative senators have started showing symptoms of concern about the budget and the short-term damage of the tariffs, and some of them are joining forces with Democrats in opposing the president's plan to hike tariffs on Canada. This could be the beginning of increasing opposition from Trump's own party, considering that he hasn't been in office for the traditional 100-day honeymoon period.
The final example of Trump's source of power is his federal bureaucracy reshaping: "Schedule F". He is appointing loyalists into top leadership positions in the government and the independent agencies responsible for oversight. However, the Signalgate scandal has demonstrated very soon that this is not a straightforward strategy. The lack of skills, knowledge, experience or rampant ineptitude of the new top leaders of the US intelligence and Departments of Defence, Justice and Treasury in their management of classified military intelligence has shown how easily this strategy can backfire and get these high-profile people in jail, if Trump didn't control the propaganda machinery, the independent agencies and the Supreme Court.
Conclusion
Trump and Elon Musk are offering us a masterclass in how to deliver system change at an international scale. If it weren't for the tragic consequences their unlawful acts are having on US citizens and institutions, it would be a fascinating systems change case study.
I propose the meta-causal loop diagram as a tool for making power, incentives, networks and emergent leverage points visible, helping people reflect upon and resist all illegal or illegitimate actions that affect them. This is my symbolic act of resistance.
