Social systems reproduce through self-referential communication, not individual will

Evidence

For instance, it is well known that Luhmann refers in his systems theory not to people, but to networks of communications. This does not mean that social systems could exist without people (or psychic systems), but that the meaningful reproduction and determination of meaning is a self-referential process determined by subsequent sequences of communication rather than by the will of individual human beings, the concerted efforts of groups of human beings, or some external force. Luhmann’s notion of meaning has often been overlooked or misinterpreted, with the result that his insistence on systems of communication rather than people has been seen as anti-humanist or as evidence that he simply and wilfully ignored the importance of people. This is a fundamental misreading of Luhmann’s intentions. — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 20

Categorization

• DEFINE: Explains Luhmann’s ‘systems of communication not people’ claim and corrects the anti-humanist misreading — key to understanding how system trust (not interpersonal trust) operates.
• XREF: Connects directly to reader’s project: this is the mechanism by which Stevens’s deference bypasses facework — communications/roles, not persons, carry the trust. — connects to: Communication establishes uniformity among men by isolating them — Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Dialectic of Enlightenment, 197; Communication is never neutral but embeds constitutive historical power relations — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 996; Reforming individual platforms within a system replicates rather than challenges its foundations — Nick Couldry & Ulises A. Mejias, The Costs of Connection: How Data Is…, 586 (+5 more)