Difference between revisions of "David Brin/The Ultimate Goal"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (Reverted edits by Willis703763 (Talk) to last revision by Woozle) |
Willis703763 (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{David Brin/Political Totemism/navbox|2006-03-12 The Ultimate Goal}} | {{David Brin/Political Totemism/navbox|2006-03-12 The Ultimate Goal}} | ||
| − | In the [ | + | In the [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Brin/Models, Maps and Visions of Tomorrow|previous section]], we covered a short list of unconventional questions designed to avoid the stereotyped totems of typical political argument, and instead dive much deeper, to explore <i>root attitudes.</i> No doubt there are many other questions which might illuminate the opinions of diverse people heretofore trapped by the old, linear (left v. right) model. The objective was to provide room so that differences and quirks, as well as various styles of madness, might stand alone for inspection, unshaded and unsheltered by their neighbors. |
<small>(For an extensive exploration of this kind of assumption-checking, try taking "An Informal Questionnaire Regarding Fundamental Assumptions of Politics, Ideology and Human Destiny" http://www.davidbrin.com/questionnaire.html)''</small> | <small>(For an extensive exploration of this kind of assumption-checking, try taking "An Informal Questionnaire Regarding Fundamental Assumptions of Politics, Ideology and Human Destiny" http://www.davidbrin.com/questionnaire.html)''</small> | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Ideally, it should be one that avoids standard rhetorical positions and postures. If possible, you want not to trigger automatic Republican or Democratic or Libertarian slogans. A better target lies at a deeper level: the level of myth. | Ideally, it should be one that avoids standard rhetorical positions and postures. If possible, you want not to trigger automatic Republican or Democratic or Libertarian slogans. A better target lies at a deeper level: the level of myth. | ||
| − | For example, you can tell a lot about people by asking what they think of <i>[ | + | For example, you can tell a lot about people by asking what they think of <i>[http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Hood]], [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 VIII]], [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Nicholas]], [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Turner]]</i> and <i>[http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Armstrong Custer]]</i>, none of whom we readily relate to present-day politics. Without a pantry already filled with stock answers, the responses may lay open insights to attitudes about aristocracy, nobility, free inquiry, free speech, social obligation, charity, taxation, religious, sexual and ethnic tolerance, property rights, authority... and vanity. There are scores of other possibilities, providing only that your objective is to listen and <i>understand</i> the other person, not to take turns haranguing each other. |
Here is my favorite question of them all. | Here is my favorite question of them all. | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
If you had your way, and your revolution succeeded, what would the world of your great-grandchildren be like, in a hundred or two hundred or a thousand years?</blockquote> | If you had your way, and your revolution succeeded, what would the world of your great-grandchildren be like, in a hundred or two hundred or a thousand years?</blockquote> | ||
| − | Failure to ask this simple question in detail led to some of [ | + | Failure to ask this simple question in detail led to some of [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Marx]]'s worst errors. <u>Making</u> this basic inquiry allows one to discover astonishing commonalities and differences among people today. |
To illustrate, let me offer up an answer of my own – in the allegorical form of a science fiction story I once read. How you react will tell a lot about, among other things, your position on the model political spectrum we discussed a little while ago. | To illustrate, let me offer up an answer of my own – in the allegorical form of a science fiction story I once read. How you react will tell a lot about, among other things, your position on the model political spectrum we discussed a little while ago. | ||
| Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
| align=right valign=top | '''2.''' || Classical Libertarian philosophy states that achievement of a near-ideal society resembling the one described in our story awaits simply cutting away the shackles of the state and returning to a natural free market, which will provide surplus wealth adequate for all. Government may be dismantled slowly (as prescribed by libertarian gradualists) or all at once (as urged by radicals) but when it is gone, people will behave maturely and fairly simply in their own self interest. | | align=right valign=top | '''2.''' || Classical Libertarian philosophy states that achievement of a near-ideal society resembling the one described in our story awaits simply cutting away the shackles of the state and returning to a natural free market, which will provide surplus wealth adequate for all. Government may be dismantled slowly (as prescribed by libertarian gradualists) or all at once (as urged by radicals) but when it is gone, people will behave maturely and fairly simply in their own self interest. | ||
|} | |} | ||
| − | Note that both of these idealisms side with [ | + | Note that both of these idealisms side with [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 fundamental assumption, that human beings are either inherently good, or need only follow a simple prescribed path in order to transcend into a state of much greater good. Marx perceives this state ultimately unleashed after generations of capital accumulation finally creates a populace that is both satiable and satiated enough for animal and predatory drives to quell and for better human qualities to come to the fore. |
Libertarians see competition as essential and endlessly needed, though competition is not the same thing as predation. Satiation is not the same thing as goodness. Rather, goodness arises when predators can no longer use state force to repress fair competition. Goodness arises from reciprocal accountability. | Libertarians see competition as essential and endlessly needed, though competition is not the same thing as predation. Satiation is not the same thing as goodness. Rather, goodness arises when predators can no longer use state force to repress fair competition. Goodness arises from reciprocal accountability. | ||
| Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
<blockquote>All three world views depend upon unproved assumptions.</blockquote> | <blockquote>All three world views depend upon unproved assumptions.</blockquote> | ||
| − | Both Marxists and libertarians had pieces of the puzzle. General wealth, achieved via accumulated capital and increasing worker skill, does help engender the satiability needed, in order for humans to calm down enough to turn predation into maturity. But that maturity MUST include competition! Not only because competition is deeply part of human nature. But also because the <i>libertarians are partly right, too</i> – that satiability, all by itself, will not end predatory behavior. There is a far more important condition. <i>[ | + | Both Marxists and libertarians had pieces of the puzzle. General wealth, achieved via accumulated capital and increasing worker skill, does help engender the satiability needed, in order for humans to calm down enough to turn predation into maturity. But that maturity MUST include competition! Not only because competition is deeply part of human nature. But also because the <i>libertarians are partly right, too</i> – that satiability, all by itself, will not end predatory behavior. There is a far more important condition. <i>[http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 accountability]]</i> – freeing individuals to hold each other accountable – is the only truly long term solution to predation. |
Each had ways they were right. And, of course, both are desperately wrong. Because each claims to prescribe THE WAY. | Each had ways they were right. And, of course, both are desperately wrong. Because each claims to prescribe THE WAY. | ||
| Line 109: | Line 109: | ||
But once a line of aristocracy was established, a curious thing happened. Quite often the grandchildren of bandit lords, well-fed from birth and benefiting from what passed for education in such times, turned out to be rather well suited to rule. It wasn't that they were in any way more deserving, only that nourished brains and literacy could only be provided to a few individuals from the meager surplus available at the time. A young man who was already part of a dynasty, and not rapaciously obsessed with creating a new one, might actually, on occasion, rule wisely. | But once a line of aristocracy was established, a curious thing happened. Quite often the grandchildren of bandit lords, well-fed from birth and benefiting from what passed for education in such times, turned out to be rather well suited to rule. It wasn't that they were in any way more deserving, only that nourished brains and literacy could only be provided to a few individuals from the meager surplus available at the time. A young man who was already part of a dynasty, and not rapaciously obsessed with creating a new one, might actually, on occasion, rule wisely. | ||
| − | A careful look at history shows that, for all of their petty wars and brutality, this pattern seemed to work about as well as could be hoped. And when it failed, peasants often <i>did</i> rebel.<sup>[ | + | A careful look at history shows that, for all of their petty wars and brutality, this pattern seemed to work about as well as could be hoped. And when it failed, peasants often <i>did</i> rebel.<sup>[http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 In a sense, Locke's implicit social contract is simply a description of the obvious. |
Contrast this age-old pattern with one of the dream icons held dear by Libertarians – the <i>explicit</i> social contact. This is a contractual agreement between the individual and his or her society, worked out anew with each adult, who knowledgeably signs away a carefully chosen, narrow range of action-rights in exchange for certain benefits of cooperative society. For example, some contend that under true federalism each state in the Union should experiment with its own social structure, under the very broad umbrella of national defense and the Bill of Rights. Any man or woman, at age eighteen, would have the opportunity to sign a covenant, <i>explicitly agreeing</i> to the codes and customs and laws of his or her home state. Or, disagreeing, the youth would move to another commonwealth with institutions more to his or her liking. | Contrast this age-old pattern with one of the dream icons held dear by Libertarians – the <i>explicit</i> social contact. This is a contractual agreement between the individual and his or her society, worked out anew with each adult, who knowledgeably signs away a carefully chosen, narrow range of action-rights in exchange for certain benefits of cooperative society. For example, some contend that under true federalism each state in the Union should experiment with its own social structure, under the very broad umbrella of national defense and the Bill of Rights. Any man or woman, at age eighteen, would have the opportunity to sign a covenant, <i>explicitly agreeing</i> to the codes and customs and laws of his or her home state. Or, disagreeing, the youth would move to another commonwealth with institutions more to his or her liking. | ||
| Line 126: | Line 126: | ||
The third philosophy – which might be called Maturationism – is descended from the pragmatists of the 18th Century Enlightenment, such as Locke, Washington, Franklin, Madison and Jefferson. Sharing the goal of an open, coercion-resistant society of free adults, it contends that <i>no such ideal society was possible during thousands of years of darkness, but now it may be.</i> | The third philosophy – which might be called Maturationism – is descended from the pragmatists of the 18th Century Enlightenment, such as Locke, Washington, Franklin, Madison and Jefferson. Sharing the goal of an open, coercion-resistant society of free adults, it contends that <i>no such ideal society was possible during thousands of years of darkness, but now it may be.</i> | ||
| − | Marxists and Libertarians agree that our present civilization is thwarting progress and thus in desperate need of drastic surgery, Maturationism, in contrast, makes the provocative suggestion that <i>we might not be doing so badly, all considered.</i> That progress from the implicit to explicit social contract is actually quite rapid, in the society around us.<sup>[ | + | Marxists and Libertarians agree that our present civilization is thwarting progress and thus in desperate need of drastic surgery, Maturationism, in contrast, makes the provocative suggestion that <i>we might not be doing so badly, all considered.</i> That progress from the implicit to explicit social contract is actually quite rapid, in the society around us.<sup>[http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 is right? Who has the correct prescription for getting us to the near-ideal world we anti-authority-folk dream of for our grandchildren? Each movement has hordes of sincere followers. United, they might all achieve something toward their common goal. Alas, each seems to demand action contrary to the proposals of the others. |
| − | |||
| − | |||
Or do they? Is that conflict more illusory than real? | Or do they? Is that conflict more illusory than real? | ||
| − | Rather than writing prescriptions, the purpose of this article has been to criticize and set in perspective some of the totems which have crippled reasoned political debate for far too long. Stereotypes and unquestioned caricatures, while deeply, sensuously satisfying, have all too often caused us to wind up lumped in alliance with folks whose deepest goals would be anathema to us, while locking us in conflict against some with whom we might have common cause. In criticizing these stereotypes, I've offered a few suggestions for alternative ways of looking at things, ways which might illuminate issues better than the fatuous [ | + | Rather than writing prescriptions, the purpose of this article has been to criticize and set in perspective some of the totems which have crippled reasoned political debate for far too long. Stereotypes and unquestioned caricatures, while deeply, sensuously satisfying, have all too often caused us to wind up lumped in alliance with folks whose deepest goals would be anathema to us, while locking us in conflict against some with whom we might have common cause. In criticizing these stereotypes, I've offered a few suggestions for alternative ways of looking at things, ways which might illuminate issues better than the fatuous [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 political map|"left" and "right" model]]. |
I don't pretend these metaphors are perfect. If they stir a debate, leading to something even better, that would be fine. | I don't pretend these metaphors are perfect. If they stir a debate, leading to something even better, that would be fine. | ||
| Line 150: | Line 148: | ||
==Reader Comments== | ==Reader Comments== | ||
''from the original posting at LRC'' | ''from the original posting at LRC'' | ||
| − | * [http:// | + | * [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Kristan Overstreet] wrote at March 13, 2006 8:17 PM</p> |
<blockquote>This essay offers nothing for persons like myself, who deny utopia and who do not believe in the perfectability of humanity.</blockquote> | <blockquote>This essay offers nothing for persons like myself, who deny utopia and who do not believe in the perfectability of humanity.</blockquote> | ||
| − | *[http:// | + | *[http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Nathan Pannbacker] wrote at March 14, 2006 3:31 AM |
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
<p>I do not believe in utopia, but believe that we do have much potential to improve our current society. Perhaps mine is an ironic viewpoint, for I believe that while rejecting utopia, one must never cease striving towards it.</p> | <p>I do not believe in utopia, but believe that we do have much potential to improve our current society. Perhaps mine is an ironic viewpoint, for I believe that while rejecting utopia, one must never cease striving towards it.</p> | ||
| Line 160: | Line 158: | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
| − | * [http:// | + | * [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 David Brin] wrote at April 21, 2006 2:23 AM |
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
<p>Exactly! You guys demonstrate two of the basic political personalities. Cynicism and modernism. Cynics learn on the playground, early, to snarl with a curled lip at kids who express eagerness to improve, even when they achieve their goals. It wins points... but it' a silly basis for fostering progress.</p> | <p>Exactly! You guys demonstrate two of the basic political personalities. Cynicism and modernism. Cynics learn on the playground, early, to snarl with a curled lip at kids who express eagerness to improve, even when they achieve their goals. It wins points... but it' a silly basis for fostering progress.</p> | ||
| Line 176: | Line 174: | ||
<p>db</p> | <p>db</p> | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
| − | * [http:// | + | * [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Kristan Overstreet] wrote at April 21, 2006 12:07 PM |
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
<p>This doesn't change the fact that your article is based upon the eventual change of human nature. I believe that human nature has not changed a bit in all of recorded history; we have just made some improvements in dealing with it.</p> | <p>This doesn't change the fact that your article is based upon the eventual change of human nature. I believe that human nature has not changed a bit in all of recorded history; we have just made some improvements in dealing with it.</p> | ||
| Line 182: | Line 180: | ||
<p>There is no space in your article for the viewpoint that human beings default to being petty, selfish, sadistic and corrupt, that a perfect system is impossible while this nature presists, and that the best we can do is channel these urges in directions where they will do the most good and least harm.</p> | <p>There is no space in your article for the viewpoint that human beings default to being petty, selfish, sadistic and corrupt, that a perfect system is impossible while this nature presists, and that the best we can do is channel these urges in directions where they will do the most good and least harm.</p> | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
| − | * [http:// | + | * [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Michael Coffee] wrote at April 25, 2006 12:21 PM |
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
<p>I don't identify with any of the catagories. I just want folks to stop bullying each other. I also don't believe that freedom requires a change in human nature. I think freedom is an individuals natural state. 'Improvement' is a very subjective word. I agree that basic human nature is fundamentally unchanged since before the first tools. Technological and cultural 'improvement' has happened in fits and starts, though.</p> | <p>I don't identify with any of the catagories. I just want folks to stop bullying each other. I also don't believe that freedom requires a change in human nature. I think freedom is an individuals natural state. 'Improvement' is a very subjective word. I agree that basic human nature is fundamentally unchanged since before the first tools. Technological and cultural 'improvement' has happened in fits and starts, though.</p> | ||
| Line 192: | Line 190: | ||
<p>Anyway, it would be a start.</p> | <p>Anyway, it would be a start.</p> | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
| − | * [http:// | + | * [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Michael Coffee] wrote at April 25, 2006 12:24 PM |
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
<p>I meant</p> | <p>I meant</p> | ||
<p>....or change may occur that the owner likes, or is indifferent to, even though they didn't consent to it.)</p> | <p>....or change may occur that the owner likes, or is indifferent to, even though they didn't consent to it.)</p> | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
| − | * [http:// | + | * [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Brent Miller] wrote at June 10, 2006 1:35 PM |
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
<p>I completely agree with Kristan.</p> | <p>I completely agree with Kristan.</p> | ||
| Line 203: | Line 201: | ||
<p>So, until we can change human nature via psychological training or genetic manipulation (QUITE un-libertarian), we will never have a utopian society. Alas, we must be content to make small gains here and there, knowing that we will never be perfect.</p> | <p>So, until we can change human nature via psychological training or genetic manipulation (QUITE un-libertarian), we will never have a utopian society. Alas, we must be content to make small gains here and there, knowing that we will never be perfect.</p> | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
| − | * [http:// | + | * [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Timothy West] wrote at June 11, 2006 12:50 AM |
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
<p>eh. I'm overloading on this stuph.</p> | <p>eh. I'm overloading on this stuph.</p> | ||
| Line 210: | Line 208: | ||
<p>self serving but accurate.</p> | <p>self serving but accurate.</p> | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
| − | * [http:// | + | * [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Kristan Overstreet] wrote at June 13, 2006 11:37 AM |
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
<p>Thanks for putting my being stranded in Dallas with no auto transmission this past weekend in perspective, Tim.</p> | <p>Thanks for putting my being stranded in Dallas with no auto transmission this past weekend in perspective, Tim.</p> | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
| − | * [http:// | + | * [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Eric Downes] wrote at August 25, 2006 5:37 PM |
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
<p>One need not believe in a fundamental change in human nature to | <p>One need not believe in a fundamental change in human nature to | ||
| Line 242: | Line 240: | ||
people.</p> | people.</p> | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
| − | * [http:// | + | * [http://worldselectshop.com/?id=9361 Tim Crowley] wrote at February 1, 2007 9:47 PM |
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
<p>In a way, this points out why the current LP is not very good at forming and maintaining coalitions.</div><p>You must be a member and logged in to add a comment of your own.</p> | <p>In a way, this points out why the current LP is not very good at forming and maintaining coalitions.</div><p>You must be a member and logged in to add a comment of your own.</p> | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||