OK
Time for some gloom and doom!;-)
These are some dangers to the transhumanist movement as I see them at present. What do you other guys think? Hope I'm wrong.
2)The transhumanism left (I hate to write this, those 19th century ideologies are dead and buried) has to come up with a critique of the increasingly conservative and reactionary old intellectual left. Sorry, but that's your hard task! Because if you do not do it quite soon, you will be left without a vocabulary- that is monopolized but the stasist left. If it goes that far, you will be forced to choose between leaving the left or leaving transhumanism. I do not think that you want to be left behind in a stasist movement following someone else's ideas, so you better get ready to rumble soon.
3) Centralism in transhumanism. Seems like a contradiction, doesn't it? Well, as the vice-president of the Swedish Tranhumanist Association I know that it happens too often. We must become better on delegating tasks. Monopolizing all functions wont work-give others a chance to set out on their own. Transhumanism is what you make of it, you cannot depend on "the head office" to take care of things because a head office cannot work in a transhumanist setting! Especially when going public it is important to have gotten these things straight. Because there is a danger in this. As long as transhumanism grows fairly quickly (as it really has done) it is OK to get bossed around sometimes. Members see that their resources and freedom increases quicker than HQ gets around to control it. But when it doesn't, the quickest way to increase it is secession (just look at the Masons), a very clear hard secession often depending on purely personal reasons (Mr.X doesn't like Mr. Q at HQ). I think that the best way to get around this problem is to avoid it completely by decentralizing early on and making this VERY clear to the members.
Sincerely
Waldemar Ingdahl