3 ms·

What about Khan? According to the backstory revealed in the episode, Khan is one of a group of genetically engineered superhumans, bred to be free of the usual

What about Khan? According to the backstory revealed in the episode, Khan is one of a group of genetically engineered superhumans, bred to be free of the usual human mental and physical limitations, who were removed from power after the Eugenics Wars of the 1990s.[3] Khan had been both the most successful conqueror and the most benign ruler of the group, ruling more than a quarter of the Earth's area across Asia to the Middle East from 1992 to 1996 with a firm but generally peaceful hand until he was deposed. There's a lot of would be rulers practically mimicking that today. Isn't the big issue about how you get from a society with scarcity to one without? Nobody agrees how that should be done (or perhaps for some if it can), and without that agreement someone is going to have to force that from above and force that on to other people. Someone has to be the loser, whether it's the working class person in middle America or the Middle Eastern refugee. I guess Thiel is against that from above approach, though it's ironic that he should be one of the largest funders, drivers, and proponents of illiberal and undemocratic companies.

Arizhel 10y ago
What are you talking about? No one really has to "lose" much of anything in a post-scarcity society, because, by definition, there's no scarcity! Now in reality it isn't quite so simple, but remember we're talking about fictional future societies where many resources (esp. energy) simply are not scarce the way they are now, so this may be hard for a lot of people to grasp. So in that society, food, energy, material things are generally free or extremely cheap. The main thing that probably still will be scarce is real estate. So if you're a billionaire with a 700-acre compound in Hawaii, then in a socialist post-scarcity society, you're probably going to lose out eventually. But for everyone else, there's really no downside. Middle Eastern refugees will enjoy the same lifestyle as middle class middle Americans (and might not need to feel the need to leave the middle east at all; such a society wouldn't have problems with civil wars and unrest), and the latter will have a nicer lifestyle without having to slave away at some soul-sucking job and worrying about losing healthcare benefits. But neither of them is likely going to be able to own a whole tropical island and have an army of (human) servants.

Arizhel 10y ago

What are you talking about? No one really has to "lose" much of anything in a post-scarcity society, because, by definition, there's no scarcity! Now in reality it isn't quite so simple, but remember we're talking about fictional future societies where many resources (esp. energy) simply are not scarce the way they are now, so this may be hard for a lot of people to grasp. So in that society, food, energy, material things are generally free or extremely cheap. The main thing that probably still will be scarce is real estate. So if you're a billionaire with a 700-acre compound in Hawaii, then in a socialist post-scarcity society, you're probably going to lose out eventually. But for everyone else, there's really no downside. Middle Eastern refugees will enjoy the same lifestyle as middle class middle Americans (and might not need to feel the need to leave the middle east at all; such a society wouldn't have problems with civil wars and unrest), and the latter will have a nicer lifestyle without having to slave away at some soul-sucking job and worrying about losing healthcare benefits. But neither of them is likely going to be able to own a whole tropical island and have an army of (human) servants.