← Back to Principles & Philosophy

Seeing Like a State

James C. Scott and the dangers of High Modernism

The Core Warning

In Seeing Like a State, James C. Scott shows how 20th-century governments repeatedly failed when they tried to impose “High Modernist” visions of order on complex, living societies. They simplified reality into legible maps, tables, and plans — and in doing so destroyed the practical, local knowledge that actually made societies work.

High Modernism vs Metis

High Modernism

The belief that society can be redesigned like a machine. Central planners create grand, uniform schemes (straight roads, identical housing blocks, scientific forestry) that look orderly on paper but ignore the messy, adaptive reality of human life.

Metis

The practical, local, experiential knowledge that cannot be easily written down or centralised. It is the knowledge of the farmer who knows exactly when to plant, the nurse who senses when a patient is deteriorating, the community that understands its own needs.

How NCG Directly Addresses Scott’s Critique

Radical Subsidiarity

By pushing the vast majority of decisions down to Regional Commons Assemblies and local juries, NCG keeps governance at the scale where Metis actually exists.

Sortition Juries as Carriers of Metis

Ordinary citizens bring their lived experience and practical knowledge into decision-making. This is the opposite of the technocratic High Modernist expert class Scott warned against.

Forced Construction Rule

Prevents the pure negation and abstract planning that High Modernist schemes thrive on. Every objection must include a practical, grounded alternative.

Optionality and Experimentation

Regions are explicitly encouraged to try different approaches. This preserves diversity and allows Metis to evolve locally rather than being crushed by national uniformity.

The NCG Answer to High Modernism

“We do not try to see like a state. We deliberately design the system so that the state sees less and the people see more.”