This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
True post-scarcity is likely impossible in a dying universe with a fixed and ever diminishing negentropy budget. Even then, it's likely possible to meet all the requirements that humans usuay aspire to, with an infinitesimal fraction of it. If my needs for resources, energy and computation are all met till Heat Death, I don't really care how the economy is organized, even if I expect some degree of capitalism.
Capitalism is clearly the least bad of all current economic systems, or so it seems to me, even if you skim a lot off the top and redistribute it, you'd have far less to skim if you opted for communism. Even if, when looking at the most relevant organism, a company or corporation, the internal organization isn't itself capitalist.
Price signals as pure as what a seller wishes to make and a buyer wishes to buy are incredibly valuable for lubricating the exchange of goods and services, and while I expect a monolithic superintelligence to do better, in part because it has far better internal alignment and can avoid Principal Agent problems, existing attempts at a command economy with prices explicitly computed in advance seem currently infeasible, at least when the Soviets tried it.
But the whole problem with capitalism in a post-scarcity environment is that it relies on price signals set by supply and demand.
If we invent the Mr. Fusion and Replicators such that we can produce everything anyone wants for basically free forever, capitalism has no mechanism to give those things to people, because the supply is infinite so the price is zero so no one can make money distributing it.
Capitalism is great for deciding how best to spend scarce resources, which is the type of economy we've been in for all of human history so far, and may continue to be the best way to distribute eg real estate and prostitutes and other inherently scarce goods into the far future.
But as more and more goods fall into post-scarcity (including the push to a digital/information economy), we increasingly need a new system that functions well under those conditions.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link