J. R. Molloy wrote:
> Dan Fabulich wrote,
> > We endorse spontaneous order (which is
> > really a series of physically entropic processes) and, if we need to
> > bother, preventing universal heat death.
>
> Since it's spontaneous, it obviously doesn't require any endorsement.
> What's really at issue here is accurately identifying human social trends
> which are extropic (life affirming) and separating them from trends
> accurately identified as entropic (tending to stasis).
Once again you're being too literal. I take the free market to be a
good example of spontaneous order, but it does need some advocacy: if
no one advocates getting out of its way and letting it work, it won't
happen.
> > No, this misses the point that transhuman fascists, for example, are
> > in no way extropic, not even by virtue of the fact that they support
> > transhumanism.
>
> You're talking about transhumanists who refer to themselves as "fascists"?
> This boggles my bogosity meter. How can an admitted fascist (a usually
> derogatory characterization) claim to support transhumanism? It seems to
> me such an individual would experience a severe case of cognitive
> dissonance, no? Or else the claim is just plain bogus.
I take transhumanism to be a fairly sparse set of beliefs about
whether and how we should use future technology to improve our
welfare. Being a fascist doesn't support or conflict with this view
at all. Being a fascist merely means that you endorse strong
authoritarian political and economic policies, generally prioritizing
one's nation-race above the individual. (Though Nick Bostrom raised
an important point about humanism that I'll reply to separately.)
More to the point, while being a "fascist" is a term WE use
negatively, it used to be a popular political movement. Many people
around the world throughout the 20th century have been proud to call
themselves fascists, and some still do today. I take it that these
people *shouldn't* be proud of this, but there's no reason to expect
that they'd be self-hating or that *they'd* find any significant
negative connotations in their beliefs.
> > If you must nitpick, I suppose they're more entropic than luddites,
> > but that's really not saying very much.
>
> No, not saying much at all, in light of how you've described their other
> attributes. Fascistic luddites... sounds like a profile for self-hating
> losers.
<blink blink> Yes, I *do* think that fascistic luddites are losers,
but there's no reason to think that they'd be self-hating. Of course,
no luddite is a transhumanist, but that goes without saying.
Maybe this will be clearer. You can be a fascist transhumanist, or
you can be a fascist opposed to transhumanism, or you can be a
transhumanist opposed to fascism.
You can be both. You can be one or the other. You can be neither.
You can be a fascist luddite. You can be a non-fascist luddite. But
you can't be a luddite transhumanist.
Got it?
> > Transhumanism without a commitment to extropy is just transhumanism.
> > This can turn into an extropic society, or it can turn out in a
> > dystopic socialist nightmare.
>
> Okay, I think I'm getting it now. Evidently transhumanists can go backward
> as well as forward, they can revert to primordial primitivism and/or
> progress toward their socialist dystopian future. Either way, your
> explanation of them makes them seem irrelevant via their own imcompetence.
> Unless of course they have some means for brainwashing a large population
> and enslaving them to their twisted ideology. You didn't have that
> scenario in mind, I trust.
I don't know where you got this interpretation. I said that *some*
transhumanists, on account of their opposal to extropy, are entropic,
would endorse entropic outcomes, etc. I named fascist transhumanists
as an obvious example. There's no prima facie reason to think that
these people would be incompetent at all.
I never said that transhumans could "revert to primordial
primitivism," unless by "reversion to primitivism" you mean "could
turn to fascism," which is a stretch. You seem to think that I said
that transhumanists could be luddites, which is quite silly. ("I hate
high tech, so I'm going to upload my consciousness!")
However, I have every reason to think that a proud group of fascist
transhumanists could indeed bring about a high tech socialist
dystopia. This says nothing about socialism generally, says nothing
about whether socialism must always be dystopic. All I'm saying is
that a transhuman Nazi future would indeed be a nightmare. (It
would also be socialist, but that's not my main point.)
> > Consider, for example, the Nazis, <dum dum dum, discussion ends> many
> > of whom would self-identify as transhuman fascists. In a possible
> > Nazi future, the Aryan technocratic elite would live forever, and the
> > rest of us would be enslaved or crushed. But just because the Aryan
> > elite would use High Tech to live forever doesn't mean that a Nazi
> > future would be anything close to extropic. And they'd hardly mind
> > that. As far as they're concerned, extropy is dumb.
>
> (Sigh) Now we've got these transhumans who are willing to identify
> themselves not only as fascists, but also as nazis... So, how can they
> expect any rational beings to take them seriously?
Beats me.
> Don't intelligent people know that socialism doesn't work because it
> fails to provide adequate incentives to produce the materials needed
> for prosperity? Don't enough folks understand that nationalism means
> war? Doesn't the word fascist elicit negative reactions from
> educated people?
Modern fascists seem to have rationalized their way around such
problems. These people really are out there:
http://dir.yahoo.com/Society_and_Culture/Cultures_and_Groups/White_Pride_and_Racialism/
Or just search on "racialism." It's the code word for "politically
racist and proud of it."
> I thought I had done my homework on this, Dan. Now it seems you're
> informing me that transhumanists are somewhat lower on the
> evolutionary scale than scum-sucking trolls. Well, at least I never
> told anyone that I was a transhumanist.
Again, this is just silly. I'M a transhumanist. But, you know, some
transhumanists believe bad things. Fascist transhumanists believe bad
things. That's all.
-Dan
-unless you love someone-
-nothing else makes any sense-
e.e. cummings
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:34 MDT