4 ms·
I think a lot of 90s and early 2000's idealist movements have been disbanded or migrated to smaller groups that are equally unable to change things. I remember
by drzaiusapelord 5y ago
I think a lot of 90s and early 2000's idealist movements have been disbanded or migrated to smaller groups that are equally unable to change things. I remember when copyright reform was the biggest thing with Lessig and that's entirely dead. Douglass Rushkoff went from famous intellectual to nobody. Cory Doctorow also entirely ignored now. I think a lot of these people realized that if they can't fix politics then they can't enact their agenda. If your nation state and electorate works against your ideals then you'll eventually fail. You have to fix the electorate first and that took a big step backwards by watching social media turn into conspiracy right-wing media and radicalize tens of millions of americans towards sociopathic, pro-death, anti-prosperity, pro-faith, and anti-intellectual views. None of which lead to utopia, but to further corruption and victimization.
I also think these people were relatively young and now have families and mortgages and retirement accounts to pay for and the wind was taken out of their ideological sails when they realized the system will punish them if they don't assimilate into the status quo. Many cypherpunks just write code for big companies and writers have moved onto chasing literary fads to make rent. Its either that or be thrown them into poverty. The system you want to reform has built-in anti-reform mechanisms and your needed paycheck, especially tied to your health insurance, is one of those mechanisms. This is also why so many famous reformers were either old-money types or had ideologically aligned patrons to fund them. These grassroots groups don't often have
that so they fail.
Successful peaceful reform movements are actually shadow-funded and shadow-politicked for by the elites. Elites against other elites and using people like this for their own ends. Elites won't sign on to anything that potentially hurts their wealth or power, which all these idealistic reform movements would do. Short of a popular uprising and violent revolution, we can expect the same lack of progress on utopian thinking in the future because utopia is attainable, its just the resources that's needed for it are controlled by people who don't want to give them up.
- chmod600 5y ago"Short of a popular uprising and violent revolution, we can expect the same lack of progress on utopian thinking in the future because utopia is attainable, its just the resources that's needed for it are controlled by people who don't want to give them up." The problem I have with this perspective is not that it's necessarily wrong, but it's not falsifiable. There have been many attempts at "start over" utopian societies, sometimes involving a violent popular upsrising and some through peaceful means. Some big and some small in scale. They never produce the desired outcome. That by itself isn't so bad -- experimentation could theoretically be good, even if many lives are lost in the process. But what's really bad is we don't seem to be learning from the failures at all, so it's basically repeating the same experiment again and again with a few tweaks in philosophy that has little bearing on the practical implementation. Progress seems to come when people are willing to take incremental steps that have positive short term results for a significant fraction of people. Then building on that.