The Politics of Transhumanism (My reply to Anders reply to me)

From: Natasha Vita-More (
Date: Sat Jan 19 2002 - 09:07:48 MST

At 11:24 PM 1/17/02 +0100, Anders wrote:

> wrote:

> > Let's discuss this Anders. I agree that it is probably not a good idea
> > to discuss transhumanist in a debate regarding politics, unless you are
> > discussing the future of humanity, topic of human potential, social
> > cultures, etc. If you are discussing the social fabric of individuals
> > who make up any one ideological agenda, it might also be worthwhile to
> > mention, who are part of the business world and scientific/technological
> > development, it might also be a good idea to discuss the people market.
>(snip) As long as we have debates as the current one,
>where even the definition of the fundamentals is in the air, then it would be
>hard to gain anything from mixing in the "trademark" of transhumanism into
>the debate without being able to back it up with strong ideological

If a person positions her arguments based on a clear ideological viewpoint,
it reflects better on an "ism" rather than parroting an "ism". The nice
thing about forming an ideology is that it can be personal or
individual. Once this is established, the mention and reference to
formalized "isms" becomes a clear point of reference rather than dependency
and give more depth and character to the individual, and in turn the
association or organization.

> > I?d like to know what advantages you find in the European Liberal political
> >agenda. Could you please expand on what basic principles stand out as being
> >aligned with a futurist agenda, especially ones which encourages and
> >protects individual advancement?
>I think this is mostly a matter of misunderstanding. I consider myself
>libertarian (my current reading is _The Machinery of Freedom_ by David
>Friedman, but I think I'm a minarchist, not an anarcho-capitalist :-), but
>since this term is generally called liberal here in Sweden, I tend to point
>out the difference, which may cause extra confusion. I'm definitely not the
>US kind of liberal, which here in Sweden would be a rightist social democrat
>(although I do have many social democrat friends, some of which regard
>themselves as transhumanists).

This is interesting. Thanks for elaborating. I consider myself "in the
process". While I am a registered libertarian, I don't vote party ticket.
I vote on what issues are at hand and how best to deal with them at the
time to effectuate what I think would ultimately set policies in a
transhumanist direction. I'm more interested in political policies at this
time than in that past and this is due to the bioteck/therapeutic cloning
situation her in the U.S.

Right now, I don't think politics can do much to change the current
situation. What I do think is important is to focus on issues and voice
views/opinions. These views/opinions can be made effective by sending out
press releases -- lots of them and very targeted. These press release can
say a heck of a lot more than a single vote. And, here I'll place my best
bet on getting a smart thought pattern going and letting it be publically
heard from both ExI and Pro-Act. This is my best marketing strategy for
personally dealing with an appropriate ideology for myself and which will,
I trust, express the ideas of transhumanism.

> > It is not up to any one organization to do the work for us. Why rely on
> > ExI? It's certainly the best thing we have available for us today and
> > hopefully tomorrow, but it is an organization comprised of people. The
> > people make the organization work or not work.
>This is true, but there is also an effect of the organization on people.
>Certain styles of organization or organization cultures attract different
>people, and this will in turn shape the organization and its work. In the end
>it is always up to the individuals, but if organizations can be created
>suitable for certain aims more high quality individuals can be stimulated to
>work together.

Yes, ultimately people make the organization work or not work, that's why
its so essential that the organizations we are members of truly reflect our
views, and help to give us momentum to be passionate about our views. It
seems that too much emphasis is placed on trying to separate out 20th
century politics rather than understand and bring to light the benefits of
each political aspiration and look at each point as being transhumanist or
not. This is a far better to develop a 21st century ideology than relying
on outdated models. (I hope this sentence does not become my by-line -:))

Natasha Vita-More

Founder, Transhumanist Arts
Art Director, Digital Design

"I'd rather be inebriated on a classic life than a 1996 classic Merlot."

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:35 MST