A Field Guide to the Machine
Many Nations, Under Dollars, Divisible.
A civic evidence platform that traces what people feel back to what is documented. Rising costs, institutional failures, eroding trust: these are not random. They have structural causes, and those causes are traceable.
What this is, what it contains, where to begin.
Amicus Index is a civic evidence platform. It takes the things people experience (rising costs, failing systems, promises that do not match outcomes) and traces them back to documented, structural causes. Every claim is tagged by evidence tier, every source is cited, and counterarguments are included by design.
Every claim is tagged so you always know what level of certainty you are reading:
The archive includes 40 chapters of structured analysis covering systemic issues in American life, from tariffs and trade to corporate consolidation, government shutdowns, monetary policy, and historical parallels. It also includes a Said vs. Did tracker comparing 101 public claims against documented outcomes, a cross-chapter connection graph, a 119-term glossary, and a 153-entry timeline. The full archive is being prepared for public release in phases.
Read the launch note to understand why this project exists and what it set out to do.
Follow the newsletter for new analysis, patterns, and evidence as they publish. Free, no spam.
Support the buildout to keep the work independent and the archive growing.
A launch note from the builder.
This project started with a question most people have asked at some point: why does everything feel broken?
Not broken in the way that gets fixed next quarter. Broken in the way where the cost of insulin keeps rising and no one can explain who decided that. Where a bridge collapses and the investigation reveals that everyone knew. Where a public official says one thing on camera and does the opposite in committee, and both are documented, and nothing changes.
I started tracing those questions back to their sources. Not opinions, not takes; documented structural causes. Government reports, court filings, peer-reviewed research, regulatory records, Congressional testimony. What I found was that these problems are not random, not isolated, and not new. They are connected, they are traceable, and in many cases the people responsible for them have said one thing and done another, on the record.
The name comes from "amicus curiae": a legal posture of offering evidence to help clarify a matter under review. That is what this project does. It is not advocacy. It is not neutrality theater. It is structured evidence, presented for public consideration.
This front door is live now. The full archive will open publicly in phases. If you want to support the work before everything is visible, you can. If you want to follow along as the archive opens, that is what this page is for.
Who built it, and what the name means.
Amicus Index is built by a person trying to make sense of structural problems, not by an institution selling authority. There is no editorial board. There is no corporate parent. There is no investor to satisfy.
The evidence framework exists so that rigor does not depend on institutional credentials. The work shows its sources, tags its certainty levels, and includes counterarguments because that is what honest analysis requires, regardless of who produces it.
"Amicus" comes from "amicus curiae" (friend of the court): a legal posture of offering evidence to help clarify a matter under review, without being a party to the case. "Index" refers to the structured, organized architecture of the evidence base. Together, the name describes what the platform does: presents evidence for public consideration.
The work stays free. Your support keeps it going.
The core work stays free and public: all chapters, the evidence framework, the connection graph, the Said vs. Did tracking, the timeline, the glossary, and the public newsletter. No paywall on truth.
Supporters get a closer relationship to the work: behind-the-work notes, honest project updates, early access when available, and bounded input on research priorities. Support keeps one person doing rigorous, independent research without ads, sponsors, or outside interests.
Two ways to support the work on a recurring basis.
Prefer to contribute once?
Make a One-Time Contribution ($25)How we handle money: Amicus Index publishes a Funding & Editorial Independence policy. Funding categories and material contributors are disclosed. Editorial decisions and funding operations are kept separate. There are no ads, no sponsored content in the analysis, and no paid placements.
New analysis, patterns, and evidence as they publish. Free. No spam.
Sign up for the Amicus Index newsletter.
How this work is funded, and what that means for the analysis.
This page describes how Amicus Index is funded, what kinds of funding are acceptable, what is not acceptable, and how editorial decisions are kept separate from commercial ones. It also includes a standing disclosure section showing the current state of the project's funding.
These are standing rules, not aspirations. If the project cannot meet them, it will say so here before it says so anywhere else.
Amicus Index is built by a person, not by an institution. It does not have a corporate budget, a venture round, or a parent organization. The project sustains itself through its own funding rules, which are designed to keep the work independent and the analysis uncompromised.
Amicus Index is currently sustained through founder support. The intended long-term model is reader support: people who find the work valuable can back it through monthly or annual memberships, or through one-time contributions. Other funding categories may become active as the project grows.
Naming these categories does not mean all of them are active. The Current Disclosure section below shows what is actually in place.
Funding does not determine what Amicus Index covers, what it concludes, how it phrases its analysis, or when it publishes. This is the core rule, and every other rule on this page exists to protect it.
In practice, that means: no funder reviews, approves, or edits content before publication. No funding relationship influences which chapters are written, expanded, or deprioritized. No commercial offering shapes the evidence framework, the tier assignments, or the Said vs. Did verdicts. If a funding source creates a conflict of interest with a specific topic, the conflict is disclosed or the funding source is declined.
The evidence framework exists so that the work's rigor does not depend on who funds it. Sources are cited, certainty levels are tagged, and counterarguments are built in. A reader should be able to evaluate any claim in Amicus Index without knowing or caring where the money comes from.
Amicus Index discloses active funding categories, material contributors, and editorial-independence posture on this page.
Aggregate supporter revenue (memberships, one-time contributions) is reported as a category, not by individual name. All grants, fiscal sponsors, and institutional customers are disclosed individually. Direct contributions to the project are disclosed individually when they are material to the project's funding or could create an editorial-independence concern.
Last updated: March 2026
Active funding categories: Founder support (personal resources).
Material external contributors: None at this time.
Editorial-independence posture: No external funding source currently contributes to the project. The anti-concentration principle applies to all external funding as it develops.
Notes: Amicus Index began in late 2025. Reader support channels are active. Grants, fiscal sponsorship, direct contributions, and institutional offerings are not currently active.