Can public pressure be an effective deterrent? Yes.

Screen Shot 2018-03-14 at 21.05.35 PM.jpg
CNN coverage of recent student walkouts demanding action on gun access. Is this form of public pressure effective? Sometimes. (Photo credit: YouTube)


It’s curious to me when people say that the Copiosis Payer Organization will become corrupt if there are no regulations governing them. The reason I’m curious about such statements is evidence is all around us today supporting the belief that communities – including the Payer Organization itself – will provide highly effective control over Payer Organization member behavior.

The most recent example is the awareness being raised by high school youth in response to the most recent high school mass shooting. Students are holding walkouts, speaking out at media events and otherwise keeping gun control conversations alive in public consciousness. While there is little “teeth” behind these acts, the facts that students are taking the time to protest bodes well for a system that not only rewards people for such acts, but also enables people to do far more, without threatening their livelihood. 


There are many other examples demonstrating how public pressure is used today by communities to deter behavior we prefer not to see. In Copiosis, this would naturally extend to monitoring and checking Payer Organization members.

In Copiosis, “the public” has far more influence over individual behavior, enabling communities to police not just community members, but also Payer Organization members. Let’s explore that further.

Necessities are produced by people, known as producers. Anyone can become a necessity producer. Necessities are those goods and services designated by their producers as goods that are provided to consumers at no cost to anyone. Luxuries are those goods and services designated, again, by their producers as products and services a consumer must give up some NBR to enjoy.

Screen Shot 2018-03-14 at 20.56.57 PM
In 2014, New York Stripper Janelle Ambrosia was banned for life from the Boston Business District for going on a racist tirade at a black man in front of her children. 

However, just because necessities are provided to all at no cost doesn’t mean the necessity owner must give you her goods. Same goes with luxuries. Just because you may have the NBR required to obtain a luxury, doesn’t mean the owner is obligated to give it to you. These products are the private property of their owners. The owners get to choose whether they give you the luxury or necessity you’re wanting.

So let’s get back to community influence over the Payer Organization.


Imagine you’ve done something in your community that is disagreeable. Let’s make it relevant and timely by saying you failed to secure your firearm and you failed to recognize your child’s cries for help. As a result, his pain increased to the point where the child took your firearm and shot up a bunch of people in a public place. Obviously, once the facts were discovered, your child would face justice, but you would as well. After all, your failure as a parent and a firearm owner was responsible for your child’s behavior.

It’s quite possible that necessity producers in your community might express their displeasure by not giving you the necessities you need. Your doctor might refuse to serve you. Your grocer might not allow you to get the basic food you need. In general, your community might shun you. Causing you to get the message: You better get more responsible around your responsibilities.

The same is true for Payer Organization members. If they act up, their community can cause them great discomfort. Payer Organization members will police themselves as well because they don’t want “one of their own” to ruin it for everyone.  In this way there is no need to govern Payer Organization members with some formal external body: they will govern themselves, with the local community willingly participating in said governing.

The problem with community pressure today is it has small teeth. A single business could ban someone for their bad behavior.  Or an entire business district. These are excellent examples. But imagine if everyone in a community joined in on such an act. The power and influence of an entire community of necessity producers can be influential indeed. And not just on the Payer Organization.

Of course there are issues with censorship, freedom of speech, and allowing minority voices to be heard. But I think reasonable people will agree there is a line between free speech and speech that engenders potential harm of others.

So while there may be overreach at times, I suspect communities will get it right most of the time, checking Payer Organization bad actors and making our communities naturally safe from Payer Organization abuse or corruption. After all, in a Copiosis society it’s in everyone’s self interest to act collaboratively. For in Copiosis, a rising tide indeed lifts all boats.

In short, among many other benefits, Copiosis empowers communities by giving producers ownership over their products and services. And so long as those are in high demand, they can be use as effective means to enforce civility and prevent corruption everywhere. Not just in the Payer Organization.

Leave a Reply