[ExI] Protected Elites

painlord2k at libero.it painlord2k at libero.it
Sun May 17 13:52:14 UTC 2009

Il 16/05/2009 23.07, Stefano Vaj ha scritto:
> 2009/5/16 painlord2k at libero.it<painlord2k at libero.it>:

> In fact, it could be said that as soon as an "aristocracy" turns into
> an hereditary gentry, the regression towards the medium starts
> operating, and the society as a whole become less competitive as
> selection becomes less efficient or stops altogether. Even though
> in-breeding might be in principle considered as an empirical effort to
> protect some specific group traits which led to its success in the
> first place.

It probably work when there is an high fertility rate and the rate of 
inbreeding is not too high. The latest Hapsburg King of Spain had an 
inbreed ration of 0.27 (0.25 is the rate of inbreed of the offspring of 
sister/brother - lower is better).

> The issue is whether all that is also applicable to many "capitalist"
> societies, the social Darwinism of which may end up being more
> imaginary than real.

Many of the "capitalist" societies are only labelled so.

> Georges Sorel, for instance, in spite of his being a sort of
> "marxist", saw the struggle of class as the struggle of new
> proletarian élites, selected by their harsh life, to replace and old
> and decadent bourgeois ruling class.

Given the paper about the "Capitalism gene" in England, I would think 
that the new "proletarian èlite" are the offsprings of the old 
bourgeois/aristocratic èlite that are pushed down/out of their èlite 
status for lack of inheritance, misfortune, etc.

> To bring back things to transhumanism, it seems that most ruling
> classes whose powers depend on legal and economic inertia rather than
> by their ability to excel in whatever skills time and circumstances
> under strong selective pressures would require are hostile to any
> technological change, as it inevitably threatens such inertia.

The difference is that the economic power can be acquired or lost where 
the legal power is difficult to acquire and lost.

> May it have anything to do with the widespread governmental wariness
> towards transhumanism-relevant technology? It would be interesting to
> compare political and philosophical stances in this respect with the
> average social (and generational!) mobility in each given society.
> Whenever the rich tend to remain rich irrespective of their other
> features, and elders surrender powers only upon their death, luddism
> should in principle be stronger amongst the powers-that-be.

The problem stem mainly by the fact that external competition is too low 
(or is perceived too low) for the ruling èlite. So, their main interest 
is to prevent competition from inside and inside changes.

What prevented China from developing a strong iron industry in the 1200 
was the imperial bureaucracy that think better to prevent these 
bourgeois from becoming wealthy or powerful.

Europe, fragmented and litigious, could not effort to suppress the free 
enterprises, because who that did so found itself without the resources 
needed to defend itself from the more market friendly neighbours.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: multipart/alternative
Size: 1 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20090517/7a1fd87a/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 8.5.329 / Virus Database: 270.12.32/2118 - Release Date: 05/16/09 17:05:00

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list