[ExI] forwarding tara maya's post: capitalism, etc

[spike]

From: Tara Maya [mailto:tara at taramayastales.com] 
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 1:48 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] Capitalism, anti capitalism, emotional arousal

 

Almost none of my emails get through, so I apologize if I am cramming too
many ideas in at once. These are my thoughts inspired by the ongoing
discussion.

1. Happiness vs. Suffering
There is no utopia possible, because of human nature. Actually, it's worse
than that. Change human nature, and is utopia possible? No. Even if we all
upload or evolve, we are not going to have a utopia. Happiness (and
suffering) exist to let encourage (or warn) you to pursue actions  that will
(hopefully) prolong your survival or your relatives' survival, and that is
true of all living beings, not just humans. So the goal of eliminating all
suffering is a ludicrous one. Not only it isn't possible, it isn't
desirable. Life pays one coin, heads happiness, tails suffering. If you
eliminate all suffering, you eliminate all happiness; you end life.

2. Pragmatism vs. Dogmatism
Despite my belief that one cannot eliminate ALL suffering, I do believe
certain systems/regimes/relationships, etc. are worse than they need to be.
The way we can tell things can be better is that we (1) try something new
and find it to be better, or (2) see someone else try something new and find
it to be better. (Though we must be careful: the cash is always greener on
the other side of the economy.) 

The smartest thing Zero State has said so far is that they will try out and
test their ideas before advocating them. Some deeper reading of history
would also be instructive. One thing I like about the Occupy movement is
that they are trying to be the change they advocate. We, as well as they,
can all see consensus decision making become tyranny of the few over the
many, rape and abuse of property proliferate, taxation taken without
representation, and other problems plague the Occupy camps. This would not
have surprised anyone who had studied the long history of similar movements,
but if the Occupy folks have better solutions to these problems than they
have yet demonstrated, this would be the time to dazzle the world.

3. Evolution vs. Revolution
Revolutions are never undertaken by the bottom of society against the top.
They are always undertaken by the next-to-the-top of society against the
top. They usually only result in a new top. Historically, revolutions don't
have a good track record in actually improving the lot of the common joe and
jane. Evolution and innovation, slow and steady change that is much less
dramatic and not nearly so romantic, has a much better record of improving
the lives of everyone. 

Personally, I don't really understand the complaint that nothing at all is
working in our present society, so we ought to throw ALL of it out, and
start over from scratch. Starting over from scratch is a really bad idea.
You couldn't do it even if you wanted to, but if you wanted to, you'd have
...what? A cave, a stick and a rock? Seriously? The past ten thousand
generations of humans have toiled to give us, their descendants, the benefit
of their wisdom and hard work, and they have managed to pass this on to us
in a way that most animals cannot. Most animals do indeed start from scratch
every new generation, and far from changing their lives for the better, this
perpetual "revolution" only leads them to replicate the exact lifestyle of
their predecessors. It is precisely because we do NOT have to start from
scratch, because we are not condemned to perpetual revolution, that we can
stand on the shoulders of our parents and grandparents and see farther over
the horizon. To kick out the support under us would only make us fall,
perhaps to an even lower level than what we hope to replace.

4. Capitalism vs. Anti-captialism
I was raised a socialist, so the "anything but capitalism" mindset is like
mother's milk to me. But I have weaned. I learned to love capitalism the
hard way, by hating it first, and trying my best to destroy it. I learned
through trying to put anything-but-capitalism into effect, by trying it out
on a small scale, or seeing others try. In each case, anti-capitalism
returned my love with nothing but a slap to the face, whereas capitalism
returned rewards despite my loathing for it. For instance, while I was
active trying to put consensus decision-making into practice, I had two
friends who were both involved in anti-poverty programs. One roused the
Third-World workers of a certain factory in a certain Third-World state to
go on strike against the international corporation that ran the factory. The
corporation moved the factory to Vietnam and they all lost their jobs. Of
course, you could blame capitalism for that (Vietnam, as we all know, fought
a long war for the right to become a capitalist paradise), which we all did,
promptly and loudly. But meanwhile, the other friend was working with the
Grameen bank to give out micro-loans. The poor people prospered and started
their own businesses. The first activist, who had gotten the factory closed,
decided to try Grameen loans with her community (those who would still speak
to her). She was a little worried, though, and asked the second activist,
"But... loans to start new businesses... isn't that capitalism?" (She, like
all of us, belonged to the anything-but-capitalism school.) The second
activist reassured her, "Oh, no, not at all. Well. A little. But it really
works!" 

A lightbulb went off in my head. Not a big one. More like Christmas-light
size bulb. It took many more strings of little colored lights from all
different sources to convince me that capitalism, like democracy, is a lousy
system of economy, but better than all the rest. If you have a system that
works better, I'm all for it, but I'd like proof, not promises.


5. Future vs. Present
For a hundred years or more we've heard promises that the human race is
about to outgrow capitalism, but I suspect it is the other way around. I
suspect that there is so much opposition to capitalism because the human
race has yet to grow INTO it. In every nation that is touched by capitalism
and democracy, and the industrial revolution and demographic revolution that
accompanies that dangerous duo, certain individuals (and often certain
ethnic groups) prosper first, because they are better able to grasp the
opportunities. Naturally, this creates a backlash of anger, indeed, burning
hatred, against them. They are denounced as thieves and villains, even if
their activities actually raise the standard of living of all those around
them. In Nigeria, they have a saying, "The child who brings back the most
wood will be accused of collecting it from a taboo forest." The person who
earns less than you is pitied; the person who earns more than you is
resented.

It would be wonderful indeed if we could live in a world where we had
neither to pity nor resent our neighbors, but what system would this be? The
great achievement of capitalism is to coordinate reciprocal altruism on a
scale of billions. What system can replace this? Most attempts to replace
capitalism have appealed to the sentiments of mutual care that we all know
(I hope) from the family, where members love each other unconditionally, and
sacrifice even their very lives for one another without hesitation. We may
feel this way also for our dear friends, and possibly, members of our
cultural/religious community, who share ideas so closely with us that they
are like family. But it is very hard to scale up. Even our soldiers, who
give their lives for their nation, expect to be paid for the honor. The fact
is that we are not ants, or coral reefs, with millions of members so closely
genetically related that Darwin's law helps us help each other. 

In the West, we citizens are not only of different families, but of
different tribes, different races, different religions, different
world-views. And so attempts to found an economy on the altruism specific to
the family (evolved through kin selection) always ends in one of two ways:
back at capitalism, or down the road to authoritarianism. If you will not
pay your neighbor for his labor, he will not give it to you unless you
enslave him. So the USSR and Nazi Germany became slave camps; while the
Oneida commune and Israeli kibbutzim became corporations.

How does any of this relate to transhumanism? I fear it is quite at the
heart of the future. If transhumans become an entirely separate species, or
collection of species, attempts to appeal to family models of economics (kin
based altruism) will be even more doomed to fail. The fall-back position of
organizing through mass enslavement will be an ongoing temptation. The only
humane alternative is capitalism. Money is blind to your race, your
religion, your politics or your gender, or even whether you are human at
all. (Isn't that what everyone hates about it?) But this is exactly why it
is what can guarantee that transhumans and AIs and humans and whatever will
be, can still live in peace, as neighbors, in democratic societies of the
future, each earning his/her/its own living in his/her/its own way without
hurting anyone else by his/her/its industry. But I predict there will be
blood shed in the name of "brotherly" love before that is allowed to happen.



Tara Maya

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20111110/ae6f79ab/attachment.html>