[extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception

[Sean Diggins]

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lorrey

--- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:

> At 07:41 PM 10/23/2004 -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> >If extropians are
> >such big supporters of futures markets being the best predictors of
> >facts and future events, and futures markets behave according to
> price
> >signals created by mass consensus, and mass consensus is that Iraq
> was
> >involved in al Qaeda, isn't that more true than the flawed
> intelligence
> >agencies conclusions that totally missed the events leading up to
> 911?
> 
> Aside from the fact that this is a grotesque misapplication of the
> Delphi principle (perhaps intended as a joke at the expense of
> democrats), it completely misses the point that what was
> investigated by the study I cited was (1) the *absence* of mass
> consensus in the currently polarized atmosphere, and (2) the
> striking degree in which the two major subsets of the population
> yielded contrary consensus, not just in their own opinions 
> but in their (meta)opinion of what Bush thought to be the case and
> why.

True, but most Democrats have almost never been right about anything,
so their opinions don't really matter. Whether they have been wrong in
their public statements intentionally for propaganda, dating back to
the Roosevelt administration: denying Alger Hiss' guilt, Harry Dexter
White's treason, the accuracy of the Venona intercepts, the treason of
Kim Philby, the denial of communist international agression, denials
that mid-west grain subsidies and 'aid' to Iran cause the revolution
there, claims that gun control, welfare, medicare, medicaid, housing
projects, etc. would reduce crime, illiteracy, unemployment, or
poverty, claims that 'engagement' would make China less agressive
toward Taiwan or more disposed to political liberalization, claims that
the Palestinian Authority is interested at all in mutual coexistence
with Israel, claims that the ANWAR holds only one day's worth of oil,
the assertion that terrorism can be treated like any other crime, the
refusal to recognise bin Laden's declaration of war against the US
several years before 9/11.... do I have to go on? Perhaps that EVERY
American convicted of spying against the US has been a registered
Democrat or other flavor of socialist? Perhaps that Tereza Heins Kerry
is a prime financier of the Ruckus Society's boot camp for luddite
left-anarchist insurgents and saboteurs?

The extreme reactionary and IMHO unconstitutional policies being
enacted by the Bush administration on the domestic front are a natural
reaction to the decades of subversion and insurgency by the Treason
Party. As much as I hate what the Bush administration is doing with the
Patriot Acts and the 9/11 Commission recommendations, I despise the
actions and policies of the Democratic Party which have created the
problems the Bush admin is dealing with so poorly.

You don't have to choose between the Treason Party and the Fascist Party.

========================================

No, but the big problem, as even a cursory glance through history by anyone
with a modicum of political and economic comprehension clearly indicates, is
we are witness to the endgame of rampant, unchecked capitalism. Without
wanting to inflame this list with heated debates as to the veracity of my
claim, one only needs to consider the fact the nearly a third of the
planet's population does not have running water in the home to perceive the
undeniable fact that capitalism as an economic system is a failure on a
grand scale.

That does not mean that capitalism has not provided beneficial functions,
nor does it vindicate inferior models used by many of the various
non-democratic political systems throughout the world. Capitalism is the
Sword of Damocles, hanging over the heads of anyone not firmly contained
above the firewall separating 95% of the population from the ruling class.
What the ruling class fail to see is the Sword is hanging equally over their
heads, no matter how much wealth and power they may have accumulated. In
this sense, it does not matter a jot whether the right or left is in power
in any of the main western democracies, as the collective human system is
eating itself logarithmically faster than anyone is able to comprehend, much
less make adjustments or insert checks and balances.

David's book The Spike missed observing the biggest of ironies - the only
hope for humanity is The Spike itself, as the paradigm shifts urgently
needed to reset the course of humanity coincide with the hope that such
technologies which lie beyond The Spike will actually arrive. For me, there
is deep irony that technological advances, at times the feared enemy of all
sides of politics, will be the only thing that can promulgate the political
and economical paradigm shifts which will allow recovery from
resource-hungry capitalist structures built by the ruling class. Further
irony lies in the ruling class being unable to keep this technology for
themselves (which they will surely try to do), as the only way for us to
"re-source" the planet's resources is through worldwide deployment of
technological solutions on a global scale, throughout all levels of society,
irrespective of class based systems. Failure of the ruling elite to
recognise this will ensure there is no future beyond The Spike (well, not a
future which includes us). 

The natural inclination of the ruling class is to funnel technological
advances into the military, maintaining absolute control over deployment of
such technologies and periodically waging war to prop up the last economic
vestiges of rampant capitalism, with compassion being the number one
casualty. Control is what it is all about, no matter which political system
you subscribe to. Yet this modus operandi is starting to come apart, with
capitalistic systems headed to be the catalyst for global economic, social,
humanitarian and resource catastrophes. 

Very soon, China is going to be a MAJOR problem for the western world, and
there are a number of credible studies which show impending massive
increases in demand for resources such as oil by China, Taiwan, Korea et al
may be a principle (but unstated) motivation behind the Iraq and Afghanistan
conflicts and the formation of the PNAC group of US ruling class planners
and enablers. Bush is just an enabler....and he is brilliant in the role.
The issue really is whether the PNAC model is just an old way of dealing
with a new and potentially insurmountable problem. 

The latest fashion symbols in China are Hummer/Humvees.  What does that tell
you?  

As a mate of mine recently said to me:

------------------------
"Mark my words, it's going to happen soon that there will be a big hassle
over oil and energy generally. China is going to be the big thing. There was
a big attack on Iraq's infrastructure yesterday that has stopped all
production from it's northern fields. Iraq at full production should do
about 1.8 million barrels per day and it has world's 2nd largest reserves..
Current global DAILY consumption is 82 Million barrels! The sums are all
wrong. Something will happen especially in the context of the US election.
The yanks are no way going to allow downgrading of their economic status
over oil.
 
www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&q=oil+consumption     

www.english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=060000&biid=2004030851648


I just worked out that people in the USA are currently paying about 68 cents
Australian for a litre of petrol. Their gallon is only 3.7854118 litres and
the exchange rate is about 70 cents. The are paying between $1.80 and $1.86
US per US gallon. They think this is high and their "human rights" view  of
"lifestyle" is based on low fuel prices for gas guzzling vehicles. Imagine
what would happen if their fuel went to say Australian prices of $1.10 a
litre (ie $4 per gallon). They currently use about 19 million barrels a day;
about 4 times the daily consumption of the next closest country which is
either Japan or China depending on who you're listening to.

Much of China's industry is on reduced output due to energy shortage but
their economy is still growing in spades. I just read that if China used the
same energy per capita as the US then their consumption would be 80 Million
barrels a day which just about equates to current global daily consumption!

There is war in the middle east and there have been big problems ( over
Chavez)  in Venezuela  which has the world's 5th largest reserves and is a
major  exporter to US. I jut heard in passing last night on a news item that
there has been a big drop recently in US reserves.
 
As long ago as the 70's Kissinger said that the US was prepared to go to war
to protect its resources and "lifestyle". NO matter which way you look at
it, all this arithmetic means only one outcome - ongoing and increasing  war
unless some alternative source of energy materialises soon or the US make
"lifestyle" sacrifices like driving smaller cars ( bit this is an
impossibility in the current US political climate-  " WHAT???!!! drive small
energy efficient cars!!! - this is the US of A dude - we don't do that
shit".) Alternatively they can put the brakes on China somehow?" 
----------------------------------

At 44 years of age, the larger picture is still something that somehow is
slightly out of reach to me, the game is somehow just a bit too big, the
playing field just a bit too wide. Not that political and economic concepts
were/are difficult to understand/assimilate. More that things are changing
so fast and other forces are involved beyond political, social, power and
resources. Technology is the factor that will enable a new revolution....as
it is the only way to deal with the unrepairable issue of resources. 

Nowadays, one cannot purely live a life based on political imperatives.
Within the next generation, the very nature of what it is to be human will
change. And, according to many of the people involved, such as most of you
on this list, reality as we know it will have changed beyond all recognition
within 25 to 50 years (for better or worse). Once you try to incorporate
such FACTS (and the evidence is already right in front of our eyes), the
recognition of a new (as yet unheralded and uncertain) revolution in
political systems, tools and perhaps even a significant change in the great
divide between the ruling class and everyone else...

We now have corporatisation forcing businesses to replace families,
globalisation supplanting entire workforces in one country for cheaper
labour in another, the  thought process zeitgeist which generates
"conglomerate power" viewpoints commencing within the capitalist business
mentality and growing like a cancer from there....

I'm reminded of an often quoted saying which I now apply to my
considerations of the forthcoming Spike (for want of a better term):

"If the human mind were so simple we could understand it, we'd be so simple,
we couldn't." 

I apply the same dictum to trying to assimilate technology into my political
views....it is somewhere just beyond my reach, but there actually are many
potent minds examining such things, as you all know only too well. This list
seems to have a go at it every now and then, but science is generally
concerned with the technology itself, not the repercussions.

In my view, technology is the only source for more re-sources. Yes, Bill
Joy's pieces scared me, but no, we should not stop all research as he
suggests, otherwise we will have no response to the endgame of unchecked
rampant capitalism and nearly complete rape of the so called third world. To
misquote old Winston, it IS the beginning of the end for capitalism as an
economic construct. We now have corporatisation forcing businesses to
replace families, globalisation supplanting entire workforces in one country
for cheaper labour in another, the thought process zeitgeist which generates
"conglomerate power" viewpoints commencing within the capitalist business
mentality and growing like a cancer from there....and many young people do
attempt to mobilise against this onslaught. But they mostly fail to generate
anything even approaching critical mass. Some diehard activists on the
extreme left (I'm not one of them) may well go on with the same type of
activism/efforts for another 15 years, with perhaps the same minor
percentile results, but eventually capitalism will eat itself....and be
replaced by another system due to the desire for change within the masses. A
minority does not grow by persuasion, it grows by NEED. It grows by filling
a void, a gap, which may be growing due to the shrinkage or decay of a
competing system. No amount of activism will serve any useful purpose to the
cause unless the time has come for mass acceptance of the cause promoted by
the activist/s. And we must figure out better ways of destroying control of
media and entertainment by a select few. Re-spell Rupert Murdoch's surname,
change it to Mordor and it's very easy to see him wanting the One Ring. Is
he really Sauron? Yes, he qualifies, in my opinion.

And Bush, who is his fictional analogy? Is the grotesque Baron Vladimir
Harkonnen from Dune. No, not at all. The US supports and feeds plenty of
those types, stooges running various countries and entities on behalf of the
US. No, Bush is more like an ambassador/enabler for that mysterious all
powerful group in Dune known as The Guild...
 
There are BIG CHANGES afoot, and I want to be around to witness the results,
but there will be dreadful struggles along the way. No doubt, some existing
political and economic systems make compelling sense on a variety of levels.
But despite this, things are NOT going to get better and egalitarianism,
socialism or a libertarian society (of any dimension) are NOT going to
become omnipotent any time soon. But the time MAY come when society will be
ready to choose similar structures. 
Despite the FUD, I have placed all my hopes in technology. I have lost my
hope/faith in human nature, as history shows the true colours of human
nature. Like dumb sheep, we will eat the grass to the ground, all the while
accusing each other of eating too much grass. Politics of any persuasion
will hardly matter. In my view, most political systems ultimately become
tools of the ruling class, no matter how the system/s begin. They just
tinker around with the upward trickle of money and power. So my hopes lie
with bio and nano...and I consider the people directly involved in bio/nano
as being valid contributors to the "which way forward?" debate. 

So I disagree with Bill Joy. I think the future DOES need us, and it does
need those who still yearn for better political and economic systems to
replace those based on capitalist objectives. There are other factors of
course - I fully comprehend the existence and usefulness of broad socialist
and environmental causes and the ongoing struggle against the misguided
Right and their cloud dwelling ruling class. Yet nothing changes the fact
that the rug is being pulled from under most of us as we speak.....

Sean
(also a libertarian at heart)