The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Looking To Healthy Cultures (Review of “One Disease, One Cure” by Whip Randolph)

One disease one cure cover

If you found yourself in a bad situation, say living in an extremely toxic and unhealthy society, but really any problem, what is the first thing a wise person might do?

One answer is they’d trying to find out if anyone else had a solution which had worked.

Now ever since the rise of Kings I don’t think there have been a lot of cases of civilizations which caught the disease of having rulers and ruled finding a good way out, but if you live in an unhealthy society, you may want to find a healthy society and see how it functions.

That sets out the end-goal. “We’re here, we need to get to something like that.”

Of course, you’re not an idiot, this doesn’t mean giving up all technology, say, if the healthy society has less tech. It means distilling the principles that makes a society healthy, and aiming for that.

This is what Whip Randolph set out to do in his life, and it’s what his book, “One Disease, One Cure” tries to explain to readers.

I have to admit, my eyebrows lifted at the start. Whip’s firmly in the “there are and have been healthy indigenous society and we should look at them.” There’s a whole genre of writing in this tradition, and eyes tend to roll at it, especially because one wonders if such societies could scale.

It’s not that societies which are more caring than ours don’t exist. There’s a ton of ethnographic literature and accounts from anthropologists, visitors and even missionaries who describe those societies. Even Christopher Columbus praised the Arawaks to the Heavens as being the best people alive, before proceeding to enslave and slaughter them, with generous sides of rape and torture.

The Founding Fathers of America praised the Iroquois confederacy. (They called themselves the Haudenosaunee, and Randolph spends more time on them than perhaps any other culture presented in the book.)

There’s also a series of books dealing with “how did this come about”, like “Against the Grain” or “The Origin of Inequality” or Graeber’s “The Dawn of Everything.”

And there are endless small groups in America who try to learn from the wisdom of such groups and engage in various spiritual practices based on what is remembered and survives of North American indigenous traditions. Mainstream Americans tend to roll their eyes and sneer at them. At best they’re seen as impractical Hippies.

Randolph’s in this group and spirituality is fundamental to his book. But don’t run! What he means by spirituality is fairly simply and straightforward.

Whenever you’re looking into fixing or changing a society you’ve got a problem at three levels. Individual, group, society. No solution will work at the society level if it isn’t supported by how things are done at the group or individual level. Our society, for example, is organized around corporations whose primary motive is greed. People are rewarded for making more money, with very few limits on how much they are allowed to hurt other people along the way.

Capitalism  is the extraordinary belief that the nastiest of men for the nastiest of motives will somehow work for the benefit of all

— possible John Maynard Keynes

As is usual in books these days, Randolph starts with the story of his despair, then moves to his first experience indicating something better was possible: he spent time living with a healthy society, where no money was used, everyone was fed and taken care of and people were kind and caring as a rule. Children were raised by the community, there were no prisons or police and the leaders had no coercive ability.

It felt to him almost like utopia. Not “nowhere” but “oh my God, this is actually possible and no one can tell me otherwise, because I have now experienced it!”

This leads to the normal followups, and Whip follows up very well indeed.

  1. I’m personally not like these people and I can see they are better people than I am. How do I change to become a better person?
  2. Why isn’t my society like this when it’s obviously so much better in so many ways?
  3. How can we change society, or at least ourselves and groups of ourselves, to live in the so much better way I now see is possible?

At a personal level Randolph identifies three core spiritual practices:

  1. cultivating a practical, aware gratitude for all the gifts
    I receive;
  2. giving my own gifts fully;
  3. and living in reciprocity.

When you look at these you’ll see they all come down to generosity and gratitude. Give what you have, be grateful for what you are given. And this comes out of Whip’s diagnosis of the fundamental social problem.

Healthy Societies are Gift Societies and Unhealthy Societies are Profit Societies

Randolph means something other than capitalism. Ancient Egypt where the Pharoah owned everything is part of the large class of profit societies and so would be Europe in the Middle Ages or even the USSR. In all cases some people have more than they need and they don’t share with others.

In a gift society everyone is rich or poor together. A simple saying from my childhood encapsulates: “share and share alike.”

Leaders are those who give the most, not those who have the most.

There is no organized ability coerce in these societies. No police. Leaders can’t make decisions without community support for each decision. Those who violate the society’s norms are corrected, and if they can’t be corrected are ostracized or killed. The Zapatistas are a good example: when they took power they let everyone out prison except for rapists, murderers and drug trafficking bosses. (If you want the details of how this works, well, read the book.)

The core assertion here is simple. The moment you have rulers instead of leaders, your society is sunk. The moment your society operates on individual accumulation of wealth rather than sharing (gifting), you are sunk. (Remember that in virtually ever famine there has always been enough food. The famines occur because those with more than they need, horde. Likewise, the US has far more empty homes than homeless people.)

For a gift economy to work, we have to all want to give and we must abhor selfishness. We must know that everyone in our group wants to take care of us, and we must want to take care of them.

And that’s what Randolph’s three core spiritual practices are about.

But individuals are just individuals, and this is about creating a better society. The next level up is the group level, and here’s Randolph’s advice. A group should:

  1. define what challenge it’s tacking;
  2. decide what we’re going to do to meet that challenge; and,
  3. figure how we take care of each other along the way.

At the society level:

  1. Decide what the external boundaries are. Who’s outside the group, and who is inside it?
  2. Decide on internal boundaries. “what rules and systems of accountability do we want to have to ensure that, within
    our group, everyone treats everyone else and the land respectfully?”
  3. How do we want to live together and take care of each other?

Now, again, all of this seems pretty utopian, especially if you’ve grown up in a profit (greed) based society. Yet, at its basis, wouldn’t most of us agree that the role of society should be to look after each other? And wouldn’t we acknowledge that if someone’s hungry and someone else has way more than they can ever eat or use, it makes no sense for the other person to be going hungry?

Certainly those are the rules most of us were taught as very young children. “Share your toys. No one gets seconds until everyone has firsts” And perhaps “leaders get the last share, not the first.”

One problem with reviewing Whip’s book is that it’s long. It goes on and on, because Randolph tries to address all the ways our societies have gone wrong, from sexual abuse and authoritarianism, to lack of integrity, to education, to policing, to… (add your issue here, it’s probably covered).

So what we’ve done is hit the highlights: the big picture. But if you’re dubious: read the book, because a lot of the details are dealt with.

This isn’t to say that I agree with everything, and I think there’s a bit of “lack of plan”. Lots of diagnosis, some treatment. But the fundamental diagnosis is correct. The moment we have rulers and hoarding, we’re sunk. And we’re way down that path. There may also be some excessive idealizing of indigenous societies, but a society need not be perfect to be better, even much better.

Whip is also a bit of devolutionist, who wants a controlled reduction in the amount of technology we used. I have a few quibbles with this, but they’re secondary. No one with sense can’t think we need to stop using plastics, for example, or give up almost all use of fossil fuels. I think there’s a role for advanced technology, there just needs to be far more care and deliberation in what we use.

Overall I’m happy to recommend the book. Understand you’re going to get a lot of “personal journey” and lots of hippy vibes, but read carefully and see whether you agree with the diagnosis. Time and time again I did.

The book is “pay what you want” and you can get it here.

***

If you’ve read this far, and you read a lot of this site’s articles, you might wish to Subscribe or donate. The site has over over 3,500 posts, and the site, and Ian, take money to run.

Previous

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – August 31, 2025

Next

If You Understand Only One Thing About Chinese Government

7 Comments

  1. bruce wilder

    John Maynard Keynes did not say that.

  2. GlassHammer

    Does one even need to make a significant a change to reach a point in which things are “10% better” than they currently are? And if that goal of “10% better” is achieved once why not multiple times?

    This is why I struggle with books like “One Disease One Cure”, it presents the issue(s) as a personal or societal Overhaul when it would seem less exhausting, resource intensive, dangerous, and time consuming to just fix something much smaller and more familiar that would make things just 10% better for you and others.

  3. Glasshammer: You can’t improve society 10% ten times to make it whole. Ruling classes require division, privilege, ignorance, racism, sexism, corruption, and all the other troubles. That’s why every society with a ruling class is corrupt. In other words, all unfree societies are corrupt– you don’t choose the laws you live by, and you’re forbidden from enforcing/upholding them, so you’re not free. For the deepest cultural healing, to live without these troubles, we need to live in free nations without a ruling class.

    At it’s root, we only have one political problem: we’re not free, and we accept that as legitimate and normal. That’s the cultural disease, and all the other troubles like racism, corruption, and so on are symptoms of the disease. Freeing ourselves and living in healthy nations again is the cure.

    Ian: thank you for the thoughtful review. I agree with your point about “lack of plan.” I didn’t have a concrete plan to offer when I published the book — but that’s changed now!

    I’m weeks away from releasing a short book called The Deepest Revolution that offers a much more concrete path for people to actually create healthy nations and have a Deep Revolution (in shallow revolutions, one ruling class replaces another; in Deep Revolutions, people free themselves from living under any ruling class). I’ve found stories and practical advice from people who’ve actually done this, and I’m extremely excited to share these lessons in a readable, compact book.

    If anyone would like to be notified when The Deepest Revolution is released, feel free to contact me at wsr.business@gmail.com and I will add you to the announcement newsletter. This upcoming book will also be free to download and have a physical version available.

    Again, thank you for the review.

  4. Purple Library Guy

    @GlassHammer Sure, but it wouldn’t work. It doesn’t work. It hasn’t worked. If there’s one lesson that has been driven home over and over again over the past century or two, it’s that improving things a modest but noticeable amount takes a surprisingly huge amount of struggle, and will then inevitably be rolled back by the elite groups who have been inconvenienced/had their wealth or power reduced by the improvement. The story of politics in the developed world from about 1980 has been all about “Getting rid of the improvements of the New Deal era”. This includes the improvements of Old Labour in Britain, the improvements of the social democratic era in Europe and so on.

    If we get enough power to improve things 10%, we would be better off going all out to completely remove the power of the people who will otherwise struggle mightily to worsen things at least 20% in return.

  5. Purple Library Guy

    Making a better society has two important components. Most utopians only pay attention to one of them. The obvious one, which is certainly important, is how the society works internally–how you can make a society which is good for the people in it. Even there, a lot of the potential solutions that have been suggested don’t look like they would scale well, but I don’t want to talk about that right now.

    There is another piece to the puzzle which is equally important: How you can make a society whose goodness to the people in it does not cripple it in terms of competing with and defending itself against other societies . . . or to look at it the other way, one whose measures to defend itself against other societies will not ruin the things about it that make it good to the people in the society. Because your utopian society is unlikely to come into existence worldwide; rather, it will begin as an island in a sea of capitalist bastards. Ask the Cubans what that’s like. Even if it did manage to come into existence worldwide, if it’s decentralized in a naive way and committed to low technology, all it takes is one breakaway town deciding to go hierarchical and wanting to increase technology and committing to expansionism, and the utopian world society gets eaten by the cancer.

    A good society needs to be good for its people. But it ALSO needs to be able to decide on, and mobilize resources to accomplish, broad goals for the society, including the goal of beating the crap out of encroaching capitalists. In the competition of society vs. society, the victory goes to the one that can effectively mobilize resources on a large scale to doing that competition. And the problem is, most visions of utopian society are largely incapable of mobilizing resources for large scale societal goals. That means, they’re nice, they’re good to live in, and they get creamed by capitalists–hell, they probably get creamed by FEUDALISTS.

    (Even the “good to live in” part can be compromised by certain kinds of decentralization. There are a lot of good and useful things that require scale, of various sorts. Long distance mass transit. Device chargers that don’t work different in every damn town. Health insurance. Good universities; good library systems)

  6. Irene

    Re: “The Dawn of Everything”

    Unfortunately, that book lacks credibility and depth.

    In fact “The Dawn of Everything” is a biased disingenuous account of human history (https://www.persuasion.community/p/a-flawed-history-of-humanity & https://offshootjournal.org/untenable-history/) that spreads fake hope (the authors of “The Dawn” claim human history has not “progressed” in stages, or linearly, and must not end in inequality and hierarchy as with our current system… so there’s hope for us now that it could get different/better again). As a result of this fake hope porn it has been widely praised. It conveniently serves the profoundly sick industrialized world of fakes and criminals. The book’s dishonest fake grandiose title shows already that this work is a FOR-PROFIT, instead a FOR-TRUTH, endeavour geared at the (ignorant gullible) masses.

    Fact is human history since the dawn of agriculture has “progressed” in a linear stage (the “stuck” problem, see below), although not before that (https://www.focaalblog.com/2021/12/22/chris-knight-wrong-about-almost-everything ). This “progress” has been fundamentally destructive and is driven and dominated by “The 2 Married Pink Elephants In The Historical Room” (https://www.rolf-hefti.com/covid-19-coronavirus.html) which the fake hope-giving authors of “The Dawn” entirely ignore naturally (no one can write a legitimate human history without understanding and acknowledging the nature of humans). And these two married pink elephants are the reason why we’ve been “stuck” in a destructive hierarchy and unequal 2-class system , and will be far into the foreseeable future (the “stuck” question — “the real question should be ‘how did we get stuck?’ How did we end up in one single mode?” or “how we came to be trapped in such tight conceptual shackles” — [cited from their book] is the major question in “The Dawn” its authors never really answer, predictably).

    Worse than that, the Dawn authors actually promote, push, propagandize, and rationalize in that book the unjust immoral exploitive criminal 2-class system that’s been predominant for millennia [https://nevermoremedia.substack.com/p/was-david-graeber-offered-a-deal]!

    One of the “expert” authors, Graeber, has no real idea on what world we’ve been living in and about the nature of humans revealed by his last brief article on Covid where his ignorance shines bright already at the title of his article, “After the Pandemic, We Can’t Go Back to Sleep.” Apparently he doesn’t know that most people WANT to be asleep, and that they’ve been wanting that for thousands of years (and that’s not the only ignorant notion in that title) — see https://www.rolf-hefti.com/covid-19-coronavirus.html. Yet he (and his partner) is the sort of person who thinks he can teach you something authentically truthful about human history and whom you should be trusting along those terms. Ridiculous!

    “The Dawn” is just another fantasy, or ideology, cloaked in a hue of cherry-picked “science,” served lucratively to the gullible ignorant public who craves myths and fairy tales.

    “Far too many worry about possibilities more than understanding reality.” — E.J. Doyle, American songwriter & social critic, 2021

    “The evil, fake book of anthropology, “The Dawn of Everything,” … just so happened to be the most marketed anthropology book ever. Hmmmmm.” — Unknown

  7. mago

    Interesting. Just thinking this morning about communes and intentional communities like Total Loss Farm in Vermont or Gaskin’s doomed experiment called The Farm in Tennessee I think it was. There’s a macrobiotic commune in Alaska that’s still limping along.
    There are Mennonite communities baking bread and cookies and interbreeding.
    Mormons farming, making babies proliferating a crippled theology.
    Arkosanti and the Amish, too.
    Everybody’s talking. Nobody’s making sense, including me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén