4 ms·

I'm going to dumb it down a bit, and say that I like to think of two movies with different visions of a technologically advanced future: WALL-E and Elysium (ak

I'm going to dumb it down a bit, and say that I like to think of two movies with different visions of a technologically advanced future: WALL-E and Elysium (aka that Matt Damon movie where all the rich people live on the space station). In WALL-E, nobody works and everybody (well, everybody that survived the initial apocalypse anyway) lives the literal fat life while robots serve them all equally. In Elysium, the abundance of health and life that comes from technological advances are hoarded away for exclusive use by the wealthy. Of the 2 visions, I always found the Elysium model to be much more likely...actually I would argue inevitable. Given human nature, I just can't foresee a world where everyone lounges around in equally-served harmony. No...there will always be an elite, and the elite will find a way to procure and consume a vastly disproportionate amount of resources. Even in the movie Elysium, after the proletariat storm the space castle at the end, any "victory" will be short-lived and will just produce a new elite. So I guess I'm suggesting that the proclaimed political/economic system is irrelevant. The reality ends up looking pretty much the same in either case. And that reality will probably not be pretty once human labor is fully commoditized through technology.

zo1 11y ago
The problem with Elysium is that it just does not sound plausible once you get into the meat of it. Why would the rich "hoard" their technological advances for exclusive use? For that matter, what is wealth in such a context anyways? What are they wealthy of? Magical mythical currency that they exchange with other rich people? No, they have to give it to someone to do something. Even if it means giving it to the soldiers that have to police the ever-growing population below. Really, the whole story just relies on an unproven notion that "wealthy people are evil", as that is the only motive that can hold up. Why couldn't the poor simply pool their resources together (government?) and buy one of these things from the rich people. I'm really bothered that the narrative in the media and movies is constantly presented as "the poor rise up against the evil rich".
- DanBC 11y ago
  > The problem with Elysium is that it just does not sound plausible once you get into the meat of it. Why would the rich "hoard" their technological advances for exclusive use? Right now today this minute there are poor children in India living near garbage dumps picking through other people's litter. http://wiego.org/informal-economy/occupational-groups/waste-pickers http://wiego.org/informal-economy/occupational-groups/waste-... http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/drivers_urb_change/urb_environment/pdf_hazards_pollution/IIED_hunt_indiachildren.pdf http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/drivers_urb_change/urb_env... Have a look at the image tab here: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=child+waste+pickers https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=child+waste+pickers Your second paragraph is just saying "trickle down works" when we know it doesn't.
  - zo1 11y ago
    "our second paragraph is just saying "trickle down works" when we know it doesn't." I was simply pointing out the fact that this story portrays the rich in some sort of bubble, where they don't interact economically with the rest. Any who, "trickle down economics", most popular straw-man ever (I theorize). I don't subscribe to it, nor was I recommending it. Let's coin a new phrase: "free-trickle" and let everyone trickle to everyone else. In the economic sense. >"Right now today this minute there are poor children in India living near garbage dumps picking through other people's litter." Are you saying this is due to the rich hoarding their technological advances for exclusive use? Poverty in the third world is a hugely complicated problem. Not to mention the amount of money people, rich people, and government have been throwing at it because it's universally recognized as a "Bad Thing". I'm not going to stand by idly while a small group of people get blamed for something we have all collectively tasked, and funded the government to do. Let's assign blame where it's really due.
- maxxxxx 11y ago
  "The poor rising up against the rich" is pretty much most of history. Look at the american revolution, the russian revolution or the french revolution. When have entrenched elites ever given up power or let the poor rise voluntarily? Either the poor would stage a revolution or some outside invaders would come in.

zo1 11y ago

The problem with Elysium is that it just does not sound plausible once you get into the meat of it. Why would the rich "hoard" their technological advances for exclusive use? For that matter, what is wealth in such a context anyways? What are they wealthy of? Magical mythical currency that they exchange with other rich people? No, they have to give it to someone to do something. Even if it means giving it to the soldiers that have to police the ever-growing population below. Really, the whole story just relies on an unproven notion that "wealthy people are evil", as that is the only motive that can hold up. Why couldn't the poor simply pool their resources together (government?) and buy one of these things from the rich people. I'm really bothered that the narrative in the media and movies is constantly presented as "the poor rise up against the evil rich".

DanBC 11y ago
> The problem with Elysium is that it just does not sound plausible once you get into the meat of it. Why would the rich "hoard" their technological advances for exclusive use? Right now today this minute there are poor children in India living near garbage dumps picking through other people's litter. http://wiego.org/informal-economy/occupational-groups/waste-pickers http://wiego.org/informal-economy/occupational-groups/waste-... http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/drivers_urb_change/urb_environment/pdf_hazards_pollution/IIED_hunt_indiachildren.pdf http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/drivers_urb_change/urb_env... Have a look at the image tab here: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=child+waste+pickers https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=child+waste+pickers Your second paragraph is just saying "trickle down works" when we know it doesn't.
- zo1 11y ago
  "our second paragraph is just saying "trickle down works" when we know it doesn't." I was simply pointing out the fact that this story portrays the rich in some sort of bubble, where they don't interact economically with the rest. Any who, "trickle down economics", most popular straw-man ever (I theorize). I don't subscribe to it, nor was I recommending it. Let's coin a new phrase: "free-trickle" and let everyone trickle to everyone else. In the economic sense. >"Right now today this minute there are poor children in India living near garbage dumps picking through other people's litter." Are you saying this is due to the rich hoarding their technological advances for exclusive use? Poverty in the third world is a hugely complicated problem. Not to mention the amount of money people, rich people, and government have been throwing at it because it's universally recognized as a "Bad Thing". I'm not going to stand by idly while a small group of people get blamed for something we have all collectively tasked, and funded the government to do. Let's assign blame where it's really due.
maxxxxx 11y ago
"The poor rising up against the rich" is pretty much most of history. Look at the american revolution, the russian revolution or the french revolution. When have entrenched elites ever given up power or let the poor rise voluntarily? Either the poor would stage a revolution or some outside invaders would come in.