[extropy-chat] Humanity 2.0

[Charlie Stross]

On 30 Nov 2003, at 23:57, Natasha Vita-More wrote:

> At 09:25 PM 11/30/03 +0000, Charlie wrote:
>
>  It therefore seems to me that the first overt users of intelligence 
> amplification, uploading, genetic or proteomic enhancements, 
> prosthetic organs, or whatnot, will not fit the political profile of 
> the exi-chat list members.
>
> What is the political profile of the ExI-chat list?  

Markedly more libertarian than mainstream political culture in the USA, 
I'd say. Making a random wild-assed guess: I'd say 30% of the list 
subscribers are vocal Libertarians, and at least another 30% have 
Libertarian leanings. (Being overtly *anti*-Libertarian is a good way 
to get mobbed off the list.) Comparing this to the Libertarian Party 
showing of -- what was it, 1-2%? -- at the last Presidential election, 
and the notable lack of Libertarian senators and congressmen, the 
conclusion I draw is that either the silent Libertarian majority 
overwhelmingly vote for non-Libertarian parties (I leave the 
charicatures to your imagination) or the majority is rather less 
Libertarian than this list.

But that's an attempt to define the exi-chat list in terms of what it 
*isn't*. Negatives are easy: I'd guess a typical Exi subscriber is 
likely to be vehemently opposed to the sort of views typified by 
http://www.netfuture.org/ (which I read because I need the 
provocation).

In terms of what it *is*, the extropian principles spring to mind, but 
I'd also say that not all members buy all principles. (Hence the 
ongoing chewing over of long-dead issues.) I for one don't believe that 
extropianism is intrinsically libertarian, or vice versa -- but I 
recognize that such a meta-belief isn't shared by all list subscribers. 
I *do* know that on occasion the list has been home to every shade of 
opinion from Trotskyites to extreme Conservatives.

The one positive assertion I'll stick my neck out on is that the vast 
majority of subscribers to this list -- including the Libertarians and 
the Trotskyites, on the same side of the barricades -- do *not* want to 
see a future in which the technologies of individual self-improvement 
are withheld from them -- either banned or licensed and monopolized -- 
by institutions to which they have no access (be they governmental, 
corporate, religious, or other types of monopoly).

(Does anyone in the house not want at least the possibility of being 
able to boost their intelligence, life expectancy, or health? If so, 
you've just proven me wrong ...)



-- Charlie