The common understanding of the word “meme” is that it’s an image macro, you modify a picture known to represent a feeling or situation you identify with and apply your current situation to that with some spicy text. If you make the text spicy enough it gets likes and reposts and you feel good about your contribution to the world. Especially if the post goes viral and millions of people see it. This is a mostly valid but narrow usage of the original idea of “meme” that Richard Dawkins coined in his 1979 book The Selfish Gene. Dawkins was using a biological metaphor for the spread of ideas and posited the atomic unit of “meme” as the analog to “gene” from genetics. That through natural selection genes would be selected for based on their evolutionary fitness. It’s amusingly appropriate that this idea of what “meme” means has mutated and drifted in the 46 years since.
Changes in the world in the last decade–particularly around propaganda, disinformation, rhetoric, and social media–has got me thinking hard about what makes ideas spread and the environment in which they do. I got to watch as the word “woke” went through changes in the last 20 years and the history of the word is interesting.
1940s: “Woke” originates in African American vernacular to mean awake to racial injustice. Lead Belly uses “stay woke” in reference to the Scottsboro Boys.
1971: In the play Garvey Lives!, a character says: “And now that Mr. Garvey done woke me up, I’m gon’ stay woke. And I’m gon’ help him wake up other black folk.” Reinforces its usage in the context of political and racial consciousness.
2008: Erykah Badu popularizes the phrase in her song Master Teacher–“I stay woke.” At this point, the meme is alive but contained within Black cultural spaces.
2014: The Ferguson protests and rise of Black Lives Matter (BLM) push “stay woke” into wider usage as a signal of political awareness, especially around systemic racism. This is the high-virality phase of the meme.
2017: The Oxford English Dictionary adds “woke” to its lexicon, meaning “alert to injustice in society, especially racism.” This is when it enters mainstream institutional consciousness.
2018–2020: Right-wing commentators begin to use “woke” as a slur–equating it with political correctness, oversensitivity, or elite moral signaling. The meme is being hollowed out and turned against itself.
Now: The derogatory usage of “Woke” has almost completely subsumed the original meaning and many proponents of its original meaning have abandoned it.
You can see that the word’s usage, meaning, and spread have changed over time. There an incubation period, a viral spread, mutation, and a sort of death. Dawkins was on to something, seeing culture as having biological properties. This got me thinking, is there a biosphere of culture? An ecology of mind?
Enter the Noosphere
Noosphere might sound a sci-fi concoction, but it has been around for over a century. It was coined in the 1920s by French philosopher Edouard Le Roy. Noosphere expanded upon the concepts of geosphere and biosphere with a third layer, from the Greek nous, meaning mind. It was meant to describe the collective realm of human consciousness and knowledge that emerged as a new evolutionary layer once life began to think about itself.
For them, the Noosphere was a literal stage in the Earth’s development, driven by the growth of communication, science, philosophy, and culture. Over time, the term has taken on more metaphysical as well as metaphorical meanings. Today, I’m using it in a specific way: not as a mystical hive-mind or spiritual field, but as the ecological space where ideas live, mutate, compete and cooperate--the cognitive habitat of cultural evolution. Just as the biosphere sustains biological organisms, the Noosphere is the environment in which ideas live.
Because this is a stretch of both the term noosphere and meme let me state the definition of meme I’m proposing here:
Meme (noun): A heuristic identity representing an idea in motion--non-conscious but animated by transmission between minds.
To unpack that a bit, you probably have an understanding of what data is. Some record or fact stored in the world in a way that a human can extract meaning and understanding from it. A fact isn’t “alive”, it doesn’t change–though what we believe about facts may change. That interaction when data turns into understanding is important, that’s what animates knowledge into something in motion, something being thought about, something given importance and meaning.
You read these dead words on this page and they’re coming alive in your brain (I hope), and if you spread them to others they animate further (I also hope). As ideas animate into the web of human minds they move about and mutate as each person brings their past experiences, understanding, literacy, and synthesis to the table. With enough movement ideas can develop there own kind of identity. This sounds animistic but you yourself are a colony of unthinking cells that in aggregate do think. That’s what happened with “Woke” above. That’s not to say that the “Woke mind virus” is an animal in concrete terms, but it is a kind of cognitive colonial lifeform in abstract. A coral reef or jellyfish is made out of countless independent organisms with no centralized mind but it still lives and can act as such. And like a coral reef, “woke” is as much an organism as it is a place where other organisms live. Some parasitic, some symbiotic, and some just adjacent. Conservative memes moved in and killed the coral and now live in the dead husks of the original meaning but that happens in real reefs too.
The metaphor isn’t perfect but I think it’s fertile ground for exploring how knowledge and culture change, grow, and atrophy. We’ve established that data isn’t a memetic organism–it’s inanimate–but data is a sort of food that memes live on (true or not). The noosphere can be healthy in areas and struggling in others as data loss, human death, and parasitic memes destroy meaning.
That opens the door to all sorts of nuance:
Some memes are viruses (parasitic, fast-spreading, destructive)
Some are mutualists (they thrive because they benefit hosts–e.g., moral frameworks)
Some are necrotic (still around, but decaying)
Some are symbiotic, like religions, where memes coalesce into memeplexes and co-evolve with institutions and communities
Some are epiphytes, memes that only exist by attaching to others (e.g., memes about memes)
And just like with life, there’s no hard border between alive and not-alive–there are:
dormant spores
fossilized beliefs
viral fragments
dead ideologies that still shape terrain
Some of these can revive or just become food for new memes as new minds discover and systhecise them.
That’s the Noosphere as I see it: not a mystical cloud of collective consciousness, but a living, tangled ecosystem of ideas–some helpful, some harmful, many just trying to survive. Memes move through us, shape us, and sometimes outlive us. Understanding their behavior won’t stop the chaos, but it might give us better tools for navigating it–and maybe even curating a healthier cognitive habitat along the way.
Five days ago (March 20, 2025), President Trump signed an executive order directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to begin the process of dismantling the U.S. Department of Education. The order aims to close the department “to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law” and transfer many of its functions to other agencies.
This includes moving the $1.6 trillion federal student loan portfolio to the Small Business Administration, and shifting special education and school nutrition programs to the Department of Health and Human Services. The order also prioritizes routing federal education dollars to private institutions through school choice programs, and explicitly seeks to defund initiatives that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion.
While Congress must approve any formal elimination of the department, the administration has already laid off nearly half its staff. Major lawsuits are already underway, with teachers’ unions and civil rights organizations accusing the administration of overstepping its authority. Even some Republicans—particularly those from rural districts—have raised concerns about the fallout for public schools.
Given this moment, it’s worth taking looking at what the Department of Education actually does, and what might be lost if the destruction continues unabated.
What the Department of Education Actually Does
Despite myths and political talking points, the Department of Education is not a curriculum factory or a classroom overlord. It doesn’t write textbooks, mandate what children learn, or control your local school board. Its core responsibilities are structural, protective, and financial.
Here’s what it actually does:
1. Distributes Federal Education Funding
The Department of Education allocates billions in federal funds each year, directing resources where they’re most needed:
Title I grants help low-income K–12 schools close opportunity gaps.
IDEA funds support students with disabilities and the services they require.
Pell Grants provide need-based aid for low-income college students.
Federal student loan programs—including FAFSA.
2. Enforces Civil Rights Protections
The DOE investigates violations of federal civil rights law in education—and acts on them.
In 2024, the DOE concluded that the Philadelphia School District failed to protect Jewish students from antisemitic harassment—even after repeated warnings. Students had reported Nazi salutes, swastikas, slurs, and threats, while district leaders failed to take meaningful action. Federal investigators also found evidence of retaliation against parents who complained.
The district entered a resolution agreement requiring staff training, student programming, anti-harassment policies, and improved complaint tracking—aimed at making schools safer and more accountable.
3. Collects and Publishes National Education Data
The department runs the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), which gathers data on everything from graduation rates to achievement gaps. This data informs policy, supports research, and keeps the public informed.
4. Provides Oversight and Guidance
While it can’t dictate local decisions, the department helps schools interpret and implement federal laws like Title IX. It issues guidelines on everything from accessibility to safe learning environments.
5. Responds to Crises and Emergencies
Whether it’s a pandemic, a wildfire, or a hurricane, the Department steps in to support affected school systems. During the COVID-19 response, for example, it oversaw emergency relief funding, helped transition schools to remote learning, and worked to keep vulnerable students from falling through the cracks.
6. Holds Colleges Accountable
The department enforces accreditation standards and consumer protections in higher education—especially to prevent abuse by for-profit institutions.
If the Department of Education is dismantled, the consequences won’t be abstract—they’ll be immediate and personal for millions of students and families:
Federal financial aid could collapse into chaos. I’m currently helping cover tuition for another parent’s child because their Pell Grant disbursement was delayed. Without that help, they might have had to drop out. Most students don’t have a safety net like that. Shifting the infrastructure behind FAFSA, Pell Grants, and federal loans to agencies that aren’t built for it could delay or derail critical support—right when tuition comes due.
Civil rights protections would weaken—or disappear completely. In states unwilling to enforce them, students could face unchecked discrimination based on race, gender, disability, and more. Without a federal watchdog, there’s no consistent floor for fairness.
Public schools would fall further behind. Poor and rural districts often rely on federal funding to fill gaps. Without it, already-struggling schools would be left to fend for themselves while wealthy districts surge ahead.
We’d lose the data we use to hold the system accountable. The Department’s national education statistics are foundational to policy, research, and transparency. Without that shared picture, we’d be flying blind.
Predatory colleges would have a field day. With fewer federal regulations and less oversight, for-profit institutions could once again target vulnerable students with scams and false promises—leaving them with debt and worthless degrees.
This Isn’t Hypothetical for Me
I grew up poor. Without a Pell Grant and FAFSA, I wouldn’t have gone to college. Those programs grant—and the public university system it supported—helped me go from poverty to a comfortable upper-middle-class life. This story isn’t rare. Millions of Americans rely on federal support to build a better future.
Destroying the Department of Education doesn’t just hurt “the bureaucracy.” It hurts real people. It risks throwing away the infrastructure that has helped generations climb out of poverty and into opportunity.
Let’s Be Honest About What’s Happening
You don’t have to love bureaucracy. You don’t have to agree with everything the Department of Education has done. But dismantling it isn’t about empowering parents or fixing schools—it’s about defunding protections, shifting public money into private hands, and ending federal accountability.
Rather than burning it down maybe we should consider how to improve how it serves America’s students.
The Great American Grift: Strip-mining Americans for Fun and Profit
#politics
Our entire lives we’ve been told that America is the land of opportunity, where hard work leads to success and where economic growth benefits everyone. Democrats and Republicans measure their success by the stock market and GDP. Economists claim that 2024 was the best year ever. But as we look around, something doesn’t add up. Wages stagnante. Healthcare costs leave everyone in debt, if they can get it. Rent and groceries drain bank accounts despite working respectable, necessary jobs. Are they lying? Where’s the beef?
The non-secret is that this system is working as designed. The money was never supposed to go to you. You’re a human resource, a depreciating machine. Your manager–hell, the whole fucking system–is trying to squeeze as much value out of you as possible before you reach your expiration date. After that, you’re just a cost to be minimized.
This isn’t an accident or a side effect, it’s how wealth extraction works. The workforce itself is being strip-mined, a Superfund site in waiting. This has already happened in Puerto Rico—a slice of American planned poverty, where our fragile democracy died early. You’ll see soon how what happened there isn’t the exception—it’s the blueprint.
Our system isn’t designed to create wealth and prosperity for regular people. The problem isn’t partisan gridlock; it’s not book bans; it’s not DEI hires in Los Angelas; and it’s not the Deep State. The problem is our system is designed for wealth extraction–to bleed value from workers, consumers, and whole nations, funneling it into the hands of the people that get to play Monopoly.
This isn’t about big government vs. small government or left vs. right. It’s about who is playing the game and who is getting played. I hate to break it to you but having 500k in a Roth IRA won’t let you pick the top hat 🎩.
America’s Original Sin
The grift didn’t start with Fannie Mae and the housing bubble, it didn’t start with the industrialists carving up railroads and oil fields, and it didn’t start with Jim Crow robbing Black Americans of generational wealth. No, the great American grift is older than America itself.
The first European feet to step on this land did so with greed in their eyes and victims in their boats. Businessmen, sent by The Virginia Company, sailed from England by investors who heard there was gold, silver, and unclaimed land to seize. Over half of the original settlers were “gentlemen” a polite way of saying they were aristocrats that didn’t work. These men weren’t here to build—they were here to cash in–to send profits back to England, no matter the cost. This group of smooth-skinned exploiters were themselves pawns of the investors back home who cared little for their struggle. If the settlers starved, if they fought endless wars with the Native tribes, if they turned on each other and ate their own dead—that was their problem. The investors back in London were just waiting on their returns.
And all those things actually happened. At first they dug in the Virgina mud for gold as their food supplies dwindled, encroaching on the local Pohatan tribe’s land. The natives traded with them at first, but when it became clear that the settlers were more interested in taking than coexisting, relations soured. By the first winter, seven out of ten settlers were dead. Disease, starvation, and conflict erupted. A man was burned alive for stealing bread. Others resorted to cannibalism. When archaeologists excavated Jamestown centuries later, they found the skull of a fourteen-year-old girl, her bones marked with knife cuts where the flesh had been stripped away.
By the time supply ships arrived, the colony was in ruins, a failed investment propped up only by more desperate men shipped in as replacements. But where others saw disaster, the Virginia Company saw a new angle. If they couldn’t mine gold, they would mine people. The land wasn’t valuable on its own, but with enough unpaid labor, it could be. The colony’s leaders turned to tobacco, transforming it into the first cash crop of the New World. To work the fields, they brought over indentured servants, debt prisoners, and enslaved Africans. The experiment had failed as a gold mine, but as a plantation? It could still be profitable.
The Virginia Company was applying the formula that would define American wealth for centuries to come. Sell the dream of easy riches. Promise opportunity. Use up the labor force. Extract everything of value. Leave the people with nothing. From the tobacco fields of Jamestown to the company towns of the Industrial Revolution, from subprime mortgages to the gig economy, the method hasn’t changed. Today, we don’t send ships full of hopeful investors to die in the wilderness—we send them into the debt economy. We sell predatory loans to workers and when they fail we buy their homes and rent them back to them at a premium. The numbers are bigger, the paperwork is cleaner, and the deaths happen in hospital billing departments instead of on the shores of the James River. But the game is the same.
Land of the Free
But the shame of Jamestown came long before our great founding fathers constructed this one nation, under God, with liberty and justice for all. We were meant to be something different. Something better. A republic, not a monarchy. A land where no king, no noble, no tyrant could trample on the rights of the people.
We became free from the tyranny of a crown that saw men as peasants. We built a Constitution that encoded and swore to protect representation, free speech, due process, and the right to defy oppression. We declared to the world that all men are created equal, that government must be accountable to its citizens, and that power should rest in those people.
And in the centuries that followed, we have seen these principles shine. We saw them in the soldiers who bled on battlefields to preserve the Union and end slavery. We saw them in the voices of women and civil rights leaders who fought to gain what their Constitution had long promised. We saw them in the workers who battled against factory lords and sweatshop owners for the dignity of an honest wage. We saw them in every moment where America lived up to its promise—where justice shined a light on the darkness.
But justice, though noble, has never been enough to dismantle our original sin.
The men who signed the Declaration of Independence did so while standing on land seized from others. The Constitution was drafted in rooms where half the men held human beings in bondage. The victories of the Civil War were followed not by justice, but by a new system of control: convict leasing, debt peonage, and racial terror.
The moment enslaved people were declared free, the system that had profited from them found new ways to extract their labor. The Black Codes criminalized everyday life—walking without proof of employment, assembling in groups, looking a white man in the eye. Former slaves were arrested on petty charges, shackled, and leased to the very same landowners who had once held them as property. Prison became the new plantation.
Convict leasing was an open secret, its brutality worse than slavery itself. Landowners had no incentive to keep their leased prisoners alive, and thousands were worked to death in fields, coal mines, and railroads. When that system came under scrutiny, the economy didn’t change—just the branding. Debt peonage, sharecropping, voter suppression, and lynching ensured that Black Americans remained an exploited underclass.
But cracks began to form.
The Great Migration saw millions of Black Americans flee the South, seeking factory jobs, better wages, and a chance to build lives beyond the shadow of the plantations. In the cities, they formed communities, built businesses, elected local leaders. Labor movements grew stronger, and for the first time, workers—Black and white—stood together in the streets, demanding fair wages, safe conditions, and an end to child labor.
The Great Depression should have crushed them, but instead, it forced America to reconsider who the economy should serve. The New Deal rewrote the rules, curbing Wall Street’s excesses, protecting workers, establishing a social safety net. The government put people to work building bridges, roads, and schools. It wasn’t perfect—Southern Democrats made sure Black workers were largely excluded—but it was a glimpse of something different. A system that, for once, served people instead of profit.
Then came the war, and everything changed again.
World War II proved that America could mobilize its economy for more than just the wealthy. The war effort pulled the country out of depression, putting millions to work. Factories roared to life. Union power surged. Women, long shut out of industry, became essential. Black soldiers fought and died for a country that still treated them as second-class citizens—but they came home determined to claim what was owed to them.
The civil rights movement followed. They marched. They sat. They bled. They won.
Jim Crow fell, voting rights were secured, schools were desegregated. The country that had once defined itself by exclusion was forced to reckon with its promises.
And for a moment, it seemed like the machine might break.
But the economy never skipped a beat.
Slavery was made illegal—except as punishment for a crime. That loophole was all the system needed. And when the civil rights movement made it impossible to legally exclude Black Americans from voting, owning property, and building wealth, the solution was simple: turn them into criminals.
The first wave of tough-on-crime policies wasn’t about crime at all—it was about control. Nixon’s domestic policy chief, John Ehrlichman, later admitted as much:
“We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or Black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and Blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities.”
It wasn’t about safety. It was about keeping the right people powerless. With protest leaders in jail, communities destabilized, and entire generations marked as criminals, the backlash became law. Social programs were gutted, police budgets swelled, and prisons became a booming industry. By the 1990s, the “tough-on-crime” consensus was bipartisan.
And what did all this law-and-order hysteria produce? A new labor force.
By 1990, private prisons were a booming industry. Corporations lobbied for harsher sentences, mandatory minimums, and three-strikes laws—not to stop crime, but to keep the cells full. The system didn’t need proof that someone was dangerous. It just needed them arrested.
Today, American prisoners—disproportionately Black and brown—work for as little as 23 cents an hour, producing everything from military gear to McDonald’s uniforms. They farm crops, sew clothes, and build furniture, all for pennies. Even when they leave prison, the punishment isn’t over—parole restrictions, court fees, and felony disenfranchisement keep them locked out of society.
The Virginia Company’s plantation never shut down. It just changed masks. It wore the mask of racial superiority, crime fighting, saying no to drugs–whatever it needed to. Racism was a central but non-critical part of the story. This was always about extracting wealth from the land and the people and leveraging American prejudices was just a vehicle for that.
This story of America is one of justice and exploitation; hope and betrayal. Our rights and the power of the vote haven’t done enough but they helped. What happens when Americans can’t protest or vote?
Puerto Rico - A Planned Economy
The story of Puerto Rico starts with familiar beats. Columbus stumbles onto the island in 1493, and Spain immediately turns it into a plantation. Sugar, coffee, and tobacco are grown by enslaved Africans and the Indigenous Taíno people—raw materials fueling European wealth.
In the 19th century, Puerto Ricans fight for independence. But unlike America, they never get it. Spain abolishes slavery in 1873, but, like in the U.S., that just changes how the exploitation happens. Wealth stays in the hands of landowners, and the freed laborers are left with little more than their chains removed.
In 1898, the United States seizes Puerto Rico from Spain in the Spanish-American War. The island had been pushing for autonomy, but now it’s just a sweatshop under new management. The locals who once owned their land under Spanish rule watch as 500,000 acres of arable land are seized by U.S. sugar corporations like United Fruit Company and Central Aguirre. The landowners become tenant farmers on their own land, working for the very corporations that stole it.
Congress sees no need to grant Puerto Ricans statehood or full rights, but in 1917, they’re given U.S. citizenship—not out of generosity, but so they can be drafted into World War I. Nearly 236,000 Puerto Ricans register for the draft, and around 18,000 serve in the war. They are segregated into separate units, often assigned to menial or support roles, their service acknowledged only when bodies were needed on the battlefield. Lieutenant Teófilo Marxuach, a Puerto Rican officer in the U.S. Army, fires the first U.S. shot of World War I when he prevents a German ship from escaping San Juan Bay. Yet, when the war ends, the soldiers return to an island whose economy remains locked in American hands. Trade is restricted exclusively to the U.S., ensuring Puerto Rico remains dependent on American imports, even when cheaper food and goods are available from Latin America. A national-scale version of sharecropping.
The postwar years bring no relief. In 1947, the U.S. launches Operation Bootstrap, promising to modernize Puerto Rico, but modernization is just another word for turning the island into a cheap labor hub for U.S. corporations. Factories move in, offering poverty wages while sending all profits back to the mainland. Puerto Ricans, unable to unionize or demand better conditions, are left with the scraps. At the same time, a new form of eugenics takes root. By 1968, one-third of Puerto Rican women have been sterilized, many without full consent, under the guise of population control. The U.S. military expands its footprint, seizing land for bombing ranges, naval bases, and training grounds. Entire communities are forcibly displaced so that American warplanes can test their payloads.
By the 1980s, Puerto Rico is turned into a corporate tax haven. U.S. companies flood the island, exploiting a special federal tax loophole that lets them operate without paying federal taxes. For a moment, it creates the illusion of prosperity, but in 1996, Congress repeals the tax break. The corporations flee overnight, and Puerto Rico’s economy collapses. To “help,” U.S. banks flood the island with predatory loans. By the 2000s, Puerto Rico is drowning in debt. In 2016, Congress passes the PROMESA Act, stripping Puerto Rico of any remaining financial autonomy and placing its economy under direct U.S. control. Austerity measures gut public services, schools shut down, pensions are slashed, and the island becomes a hunting ground for Wall Street investors, who buy up Puerto Rican debt at pennies on the dollar, treating the entire island like a financial asset to be stripped for parts.
Then comes the storm. In 2017, Hurricane Maria levels Puerto Rico. Thousands die, power is out for nearly a year in some areas, and the U.S. government barely responds. Instead of real relief, Wall Street moves in to push even more privatization. Foreign investors buy up land, driving Puerto Ricans out of their own neighborhoods. In 2023, the U.S. privatizes Puerto Rico’s electric grid, and blackouts get worse. The island’s economy, still suffocated by U.S. control, is now being sold as a crypto tax haven.
The latest wave of billionaires and speculators swoop in to avoid capital gains taxes, treating the island as their personal playground while the people who built the island are priced out of their own homes. They call it innovation. They call it a “crypto utopia.” Just like the factory lords and sugar barons before them, they promise opportunity, wealth, and progress. But just like before, the wealth isn’t for Puerto Ricans. It’s for the newcomers.
Investors buy up land in historic districts, driving up rents and forcing locals out of their own neighborhoods. Property values soar in places like Dorado and Old San Juan, while wages stay the same. The same government that can’t rebuild schools, hospitals, or a stable power grid has no problem rolling out the red carpet for a new wave of digital prospectors.
First it was sugar. Then it was pharmaceuticals. Then it was Wall Street. Now, it’s crypto.
Every time Puerto Rico had a chance to claw its way out, American lawmakers—of both parties—let it sink. They let the banks own the island. They let corporations strip it for parts. They let its people starve, and when the storms came, they let them drown.
They exploited Puerto Rico because they knew the locals couldn’t mobilize and Americans wouldn’t care. This is the capitalist endgame—when the public looks away and the government helps billionaires “quietly do whatever we want.”
This doesn’t have to be the worst timeline
When the Civil War ended and the slaves were “freed,” we patted ourselves on the back and let the devils steal nearly every freedom granted back.
When the New Deal curbed the trusts that ushered in the Great Depression, we let them rebrand. Puerto Rico never even got that chance.
When the Civil Rights Act desegregated America and secured the Black vote, we let the same politicians who fought it spend the next fifty years gutting its power. In Puerto Rico they kept everyone poor and sterilized the women.
When we put a Black man in the White House and legalized gay marriage, we celebrated the end of racism, while plundering the global south. Every time we let ourselves believe the work was done they were already planning the backlash. But the people who buy the judges never stop buying. They build the prisons. They built the Alt-Right. They steer the system that was built to serve them.