Repair and Redistribution: 2 Redistribution of Obligation: When Roles Saturate, Load Must Shift

Breakdown is rarely caused by absence of obligation.

More often, it is caused by too much of it, concentrated in the wrong places, persisting for too long, without modulation or uptake.

Repair begins when obligation moves.

---

Obligation Is Not Owned

Obligation is often spoken of as something people have.

This framing misleads.

Obligations are structural bindings produced by:

• prior actualisations

• sedimented coordination

• institutional arrangements

• asymmetric readiness across the field

They attach to perspectives, roles, positions, and infrastructures — not to interior wills.

When a role saturates, it is not because someone failed.

It is because the system concentrated binding beyond its capacity.

---

Saturation as a Structural Signal

Role saturation is not noise.

It is diagnostic.

It indicates:

• misalignment between readiness and commitment

• failure of modulation

• uneven distribution across the field

Saturation tells us where redistribution is required, not who to blame.

---

Redistribution Without Subjects

Redistribution is often imagined as deliberate reassignment:

someone must step up,

someone must step back.

But structural redistribution occurs without intention.

It happens when:

• obligations are re-encoded

• expectations are loosened or deferred

• new perspectives absorb partial load

• old commitments lose salience through modulation

This is not abdication.

It is reconfiguration.

---

The Role of the Minimal Calculus

The minimal calculus clarifies how redistribution is possible:

Potential / Actualisation

Repair does not undo the past.

But it can open new potential pathways for obligations to attach elsewhere.

Readiness / Commitment

Obligations migrate toward zones of greater readiness — sometimes unfairly, often invisibly.

Redistribution always tracks readiness, not virtue.

Modulation / Modalisation

Load shifts not only by transfer, but by attenuation:

some commitments are softened,

some are made conditional,

some are deferred indefinitely.

Perspective / Field

Redistribution requires field-level adjustment:

new perspectives emerge,

old boundaries blur,

coordination patterns reconfigure.

Obligation cannot move if perspective cannot.

---

Why Redistribution Feels Wrong

Redistribution is often resisted because it violates moral intuitions:

• it appears unjust

• it rewards capacity, not effort

• it abandons symmetry

But symmetry is already gone at the point of saturation.

Repair does not restore fairness.

It restores viability.

---

Residual Asymmetry

Redistribution leaves residue:

• some perspectives carry disproportionate load

• some obligations never fully resolve

• some roles remain structurally exposed

This residue is not a moral failure.

It is the cost of continuation without closure.

---

Blame Prevents Redistribution

Blame freezes obligation in place.

It increases commitment density,

sharpens roles,

and prevents modulation.

Redistribution requires a cooler operation:

loosening,

diffusion,

reallocation.

This is why blame feels satisfying and repair does not.

---

Next

The next post examines the mechanism that makes redistribution possible at all:

Persistence Through Modulation

How systems avoid immediate re-saturation by adjusting the weight of commitments.

That is where repair becomes sustainable — or fails again.