[extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard

[Gregory Cartwright]

Why I Voted For Bush (or how I quit worrying and learned to love the war)

While I generally try not to label myself with terms like extropian, 
libertarian, progressive, transhumanist, etc., I can say that I am 
sympathetic to these ideas and that they come closest to the "isms" I've 
accepted as more true than not. So the question is why I voted for Bush.

I guess one of the first lessons I learned about politics from a libertarian 
view is that the attempt at a perfect social order through a particular ism, 
(communmism, fascism, socialism) usually only leads to a worsening of the 
human condition. It is better to look at the world as it is, and understand 
human behavior as it is and base your decisions on that.

Without democracy and capitalism, I don't feel that extropian concepts will 
get very far. Before Bush, there was a theocracy in Afghanistan. Now there 
is a fledgling democracy. Before Bush there was a dictator in Iraq. Now 
there will be elections in January. Before Bush Libya was a rogue nation, 
now it has given up its weapons program, paid a huge cash settlement for its 
sponsorship of terrorism and is beginning to normalize relations with the 
rest of the world. Before Bush, North Korea refused to participate in 
multilateral talks, now it has agreed and participated in those. (In fact, 
South Korea just announced it is opening a diplomatic office in North Korea 
after the first of the year.)  Somebody much smarter than me once said that 
for evil to flourish requires only that good men do nothing. While American 
foreign policy is not infallible, and is often brutish, what is the 
alternative? To do nothing? I think as Americans we bear a special burdern 
with respect to Iraq since we supported evil there for so long. That was 
wrong for us to do. Is continuing to do nothing with respect to that regime 
better?

    Many, including Kerry want the US to engage in cooperation. 
Multi-lateralism is easy to claim as the right way to proceed, but doesn't 
always easy to make work.   We all know that decision making by committee 
does not always yield the best outcome. Add to that the problems when those 
on the committee have financial interests. It is now well established that 
member states on the security counsel illegally allowed their companies to 
do business with Saddam. Others within the UN food-for-oil program were 
being bribed with oil contracts and/or futures contracts. Is it any wonder 
that the US acted alone?

    Much of the hatred for Bush is based upon his personality as much as the 
mistakes he's made. I cannot help but see the similarities with Clinton in 
this respect. While these the personality traits complained of are different 
as well as the the detractors, the result is much the same. People have a 
hard time separating these two things.

I really object to Bush's religious bent, and what on this listserve has 
been described as "anti-science" or "anti-extropian." worldview.  But there 
is never a perfect candidate. The only question for me was who will continue 
to aggressively expand democracy and fight terrorism. More importantly, what 
policies will reduce the conditions which give terrorism its base. I believe 
that a secular, relatively well off country that is democractic is less 
likely to sponsor terrorist and less likely to support the conditions which 
give rise to it.

After thinking about these issues, I held my nose and pulled the lever.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Patrick Wilken" <Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 8:22 AM
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard


> Natasha, Mike and others on this list:
>
> Is there some sort of Extropian scorecard for the different 
> (ex-)candidates? I am sort of curious how Bush and Kerry would have 
> stacked up. Its seems obvious to me that Bush would score very poorly on 
> many measures, but apparently there are smart people here who voted for 
> Bush. It would seem to me that they would have to have voted for Bush 
> while holding their noses against his anti-extropian stench, but I am 
> willing to convinced otherwise. So putting aside from the possibility put 
> forward by Mike that Bush is more likely to lead to the collapse of the US 
> economic system, thereby making way for an Extropian paradise built on its 
> ashes, what are the good Extropian reasons for voting for Bush?
>
> On many issues it would seem obvious that fundamentalist beliefs put 
> forward by supporters of Bush - anti-stem cell research, anti-science, 
> anti-homosexuality (actually any sexuality that doesn't lead to a 
> traditional Christian nuclear family), anti-drugs, anti-division between 
> church and state, anti-privacy - are anti-extropian.
>
> The only pro-extropian statement I have see clearly articulated for Bush 
> on this list is that he would be better (in some vague sense) for the 
> economy. Though given what he has achieved for the US economy to date it 
> seems more that that this is a knee-jerk reaction equating Republicans 
> with better stewardship for economic matters than than Democrats.
>
> So please tell me why any Extropian would be willing to stand up and 
> proudly say they voted for Bush.
>
> best, patrick
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>