[FRIAM] on government

[steve smith]

Glen -

> Yeah, I'm not much of a fan of Pinker (et al)'s arguments that show 
> dropping infant mortality, poverty, violent crime, etc. But there is a 
> point to be made that our governments, as technologies, are making a 
> difference ... at least in *some* measures. Of course, governments are 
> just like the other technologies and are pushing us toward existential 
> threats like authoritarianism and climate change.

Can you elaborate on this:  "just like other technologies" and "pushing 
us toward existential threats"?

I have my own intuition and logic for believing this but rather than 
blather it all out here, I'd like to peek under your assertion and see 
what you are thinking on this topic?

Also wondering if you or any of the usual suspects (including REC/DaveW) 
have thoughts about Roger's original assertion, given a stronger 
corollary to "Power Corrupts" stated as "Power IS Corruption"?

-Steve

>
> On 8/28/24 14:26, steve smith wrote:
>>
>>> There's no system of governance that hasn't been corrupted. They're 
>>> all the worst forms of governance ever invented, except for the 
>>> alternative of dealing with a group of self-selected fellow citizens 
>>> under no system of governance whatsoever.
>>>
>>> -- rec --
>>
>> And being a fan of James Scott (The Art of not Being Governed 
>> <https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6477876-the-art-of-not-being-governed> 
>> and Against the Grain) I am inclined to respect this POV while on the 
>> other end, I also am quite the fan of Michael Levin's perspective on 
>> "what is life?" with all of it's spread across scale and across 
>> complexity and across species (in the broadest sense).
>>
>> Until we might evolve from a slime-mold with psuedopods searching 
>> around and intruding/interpenetrating into oneanother seeking 
>> concentrated resources (like Russia's into Ukraine and now 
>> vice-versa, or Israel/Palestine/Lebanon/???).  Might we 
>> (collectively) become something more like a "proper" multicellular 
>> creature or a balanced, healthy ecosystem (or system of ecosystems)?
>>
>> We have (only) been experimenting with large-scale self-organizing 
>> systems of humanity with lots of technological scaffolding 
>> (lithics/copper/bronze/iron/steel through antimatter, quantum dots, 
>> and nanotech, just to name a few?) and 
>> religio/socio/philosopho/politco linguistic technology for a handful 
>> (or two) of millenia, so it doesn't surprise me that we haven't 
>> wandered/mutated-selected our way into anything better than we have 
>> to date.
>>
>> I am (very guardedly) hopeful that the acceleration of the latter 
>> (linguistic technology) in LLMs and other ML/AI (material technology) 
>> will give us the possibility of rushing this phase forward.  PInker 
>> might claim we have had material (and psycho-social-spiritual) 
>> advancement over the centuries and decades and maybe he is right in 
>> some sense...  but the leap-forward in collective 
>> self-governance/regulation/homeostasis we can all seem to imagine 
>> living under feels beyond our (heretofore?) grasp.
>>
>> For better or worse, it feels to me that Kurzweil for all his 
>> nonsense in predicting an imminent singularity may be right... we 
>> will either self-organize in a Asimovian Foundation/Psychohistory 
>> galaxy-spanning culture (almost surely not) future or implode in a 
>> Mad Max (or grey-goo/planet-krypton) apocalypse.  Maybe even in my 
>> lifetime, almost assuredly in my children or grandchildren's?
>>
>
>