But setting aside green part, the GND document smells to me like a cocktail of 2 poison pills. The "green" part is a poison pill for the "new deal" part and the "new deal" part is a poison pill for the "green" part. But maybe I just don't understand power of political charisma?
-
-
Maybe. After all, we ended up in a place where corporations are people, and can influence politics in a very toothy way with money, directly (a condition I am broadly in favor of btw, even if the specific mechanics leave much to be desired...). Perhaps ideas can be people too?
Show this thread -
Second, the practice of lumping together popular and unpopular policy pieces was expedient pragmatism in a low-tech world, but in a complex tech world, is suicidal. I don't think there's anything necessarily either "democratic" there or psychologically fundamental.
Show this thread -
Not quite sure how you retain a democratic spirit in political processes, but I have a few at least theoretical, spherical-cow ideas. For example, I proposed somewhere once that everybody on the planet should have at least a small fractional vote in all elections.
Show this thread -
What is clear is that we're still running political infrastructure based on politicians' ideas of mass psychology that haven't evolved in 200 years, coupled with a technological imagination that hasn't moved an inch since Apollo. We're being governed by 1761 minds living in 1961.
Show this thread -
I don't know what *is* the right action plan here. All I have an idea about is what science+tech+policy experiments are at least worth trying. The problem with GND is that it corners attention/agency in a way that makes those experiments harder.
Show this thread -
Final point, a few are reading this thread like vindication of a Trump-equivalence on
@AOC. I don't endorse that. There is no comparison between the two. She's just a regular human politician, perhaps more charismatic and principled than average. Trump is a class IV void demon.Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I made a proposal for this a couple years ago. It was mostly a joke at the time, but it’s starting to seem more like the right way forward. Although I’ve no idea how to get from here to there. https://meaningness.com/metablog/virtue-court …pic.twitter.com/cjsc62Ly1s
-
What's the science-literacy element there?
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Can we also somehow separate scientific programs from corporate interests? Because long term plans like this will require science to be put to a purpose other than a financial bottom line, which is sort of unfamiliar territory.
-
I think actually you would need to align them more strongly. Global corporations might be the only entities with the incentives to "vote for science" in some sense.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.