The Locke Nets Monster

In my last post, I proposed a cognitive model of moral panic:

• Moral panics are based on anger.

• Anger is triggered by HVAC: i.e., the perception of four realities about a situation: HARM, VILLAIN, ACTION, CERTAINTY.

• Panics are spread by a small informational "seed" containing the four HVAC elements.

• Anger distorts cognitive processing, in a way that locks in the seed and makes it more robust to criticism and doubt.

I now apply this model to understanding how our moral panics in the West have changed and evolved since 1600.

Moral panics require a harsh moral judgment: the VILLAIN is evil and deserves to be punished. Prior to 1600, such harsh moral judgments were naturally based on supernatural Christianity, which was the prevailing moral system of the time: witch hunts, heretic burnings, Reformation religious wars, anti-Jewish pogroms etc.

The arrival of modern physics equations in the 1600s shifted our intuitions about reality. Certainty in the supernatural erodes so much, that it soon becomes impossible to burn witches or heretics with a straight face. We simply can't believe witchcraft is real enough, to burn women over it. We can't believe the details of the Trinity are objectively certain enough, to martyr those who disagree.

Locke's political system (1690) is downstream of this shift in intuitions. Purely supernatural beliefs get privatized: you are free to continue to believe in the supernatural (witchcraft, Trinity, etc), but only as a private belief that you can't use force over. Government must henceforth stay out of the supernatural, and focus entirely on "real" (secular) harms and benefits.

As Locke's system gets adopted in the US and Britain during the 18th century, it makes it impossible for the old style moral panics to form (witch hunts, heretic burnings, religious wars). They go extinct.

Moral panics can't form without the perception of grievous HARM. Locke's system stops the perception of such HARM from forming, in four ways:

Net 1: Privatization. Purely supernatural harms no longer count as "real" enough to pursue with force. If you're religious, a heretic leading thousands to hell is the worst possible harm, but you must quietly tolerate it because it's purely supernatural; it might be just a figment of your imagination.

Net 2: Civil Rights. Natural rights to life, liberty, and property put at least some limits on how government or other citizens can inflict secular HARM on anyone. While not foolproof, they stop at least some secular HARMs that would otherwise occur.

Net 3: Majority Rule. If a majority is upset by any secular HARM that arises, it can presumably be dealt with by government action. This should tend to reduce or eliminate the HARM over time, and at least give a satisfying sense that "something is being done".

Net 4: Majority Legitimacy. Even when you disagree with some majority action (or inaction), our celebration of "democracy" means we tend to accept the result as procedurally fair: "the people have spoken". This won't stop all outrage, but it certainly stops some.

These four "nets" catch many panic-triggering HARMs that would otherwise ignite. They are very effective. The first net alone (Privatization) wipes out all the old style moral panics, which were based on supernatural religion. No more witch hunts, heretic burnings, etc.

And the panic carnarge doesn't stop there; the remaining three nets preemptively smother many secular HARMs that could otherwise start secular panics.

Does this mean when a society adopts Locke's political system, it will no longer be wracked by moral panics? How peaceful that would be: a society of cool utilitarian rationalists, calmly maximizing their happiness and well-being.

This was essentially Locke's vision, but he did not account for the Locke Nets Monster waiting in the wings, about to permanently roil his smooth utilitarian sea.

The problem is, nature adapts. Locke's system kills all the old-style supernatural panics, and preemptively stops a bunch of new secular panics from forming as well. But this creates a vacuum to be filled by some new species of panic: one specifically adapted to evade Locke's four nets.

Panics are fueled by perceptions of great HARM: it's their their food supply, their nourishment.

Locke's nets are so culturally significant, because they change the food supply for panics. Privatization alone (Net 1) kills what had been been the primary food for panics historically: i.e., supernatural beliefs. Citizens can still believe them, but only privately: no lynchings, no stonings, no force, no rage, no panic. And Locke's other 3 nets choke off various secular food sources.

If perceptions of HARM are like pancake batter, Locke's nets work something like this:

A lot of potential HARMs are threatened above, but Locke’s four nets stop most of them from triggering outrage. Only a small trickle of HARMs leak out the bottom: the Locke Leakage.

By definition, Locke Leakage is the food supply for the Locke Nets Monster, because these are the only major HARMs that Locke both permits and recognizes (e.g., it doesn't recognize supernatural harm).

We can define the Locke Nets Monster's food supply very precisely, because it's exactly what escapes Locke's 4 anti-HARM nets:

Locke Leakage = atrocious secular HARMs (Net 1) that civil rights didn’t catch (Net 2), and that majority rule didn’t catch (Net 3), and that the losers can still feel outraged about despite majority legitimacy (Net 4)

If you step back and think about it, this is an extremely unpromising set of HARMs to try to create panic over. It feels like you're trying to create outrage over marginal HARMs that only a sour grapes minority is upset about. You'd think religion would be helpful here, since cranky minorities can get fanatical over seemingly trivial supernatural bullshit—but you can't use religion.

This is the puzzle of Locke Nets Monster: how can one mentally process these unpromising HARMs into the absolute moral CERTAINTY needed for outrage? I'll give a closer analysis of this is my next post but for now, suffice it to say we did find a way to digest these seemingly unpromising pine needles. How do we know this? Because all large-scale moral panics are Locke Nets Monsters now. They all run on Locke Leakage as their food source.

Here are a few examples of some major Locke Nets Monsters today, and how they feed on Locke Leakage specifically:

• Racism: vast secular harms of poverty, inequality etc (Net 1), our supposedly wonderful system of civil rights hasn't fixed it (Net 2), our democratic mechanisms of majority rule haven't fixed it either (Net 3), and we can't accept the majority's apathy or ineffectuality in terms of "the people have spoken" (Net 4). Fixing it is a burningly urgent moral imperative.

• Abortion: 700,000 babies a year are being murdered: an atrocious secular harm that is not a supernatural construct like baptism (Net 1). Civil rights sadly don't cover the fetus (Net 2), a depraved majority is letting this happen (Net 3), and we can't accept their depravity and/or ineffectuality in terms of "the people have spoken" (Net 4). Fixing it is a burningly urgent moral imperative.

• Climate: vast secular harm to the planet and human thriving (Net 1), civil rights seem irrelevant (Net 2), the majority is oblivious and letting this happen (Net 3), and we can't accept their cluelessness or ineffectuality (Net 4). Fixing it is a burningly urgent moral imperative.

• (with same logic for other panics over LGBT-phobia, gun violence, etc)

Locke's system was largely adopted in the US and Britain by the end of the 18th century. The old style moral panics promptly went extinct (witch hunts, heretic burnings, religious civil wars etc), and the new Locke Nets panics promptly took their place.

The new panic species was clearly visible in the US by about 1820 at the latest. See especially Abolition. See also, e.g., the Temperance movement: a panic over alcohol as massive HARM to secular public health.

The American Revolution can also been seen as an early Locke Nets Monster. The Declaration of Independence presented a list of secular grievances, demanded civil rights (to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”), and majority rule couldn’t fix it because they had no representation in Parliament.

Next post will look at the new mental framings that were needed, to let the Locke Nets Monster digest seemingly unpromising HARMs into potent moral absolutes.