4 ms·

I would like Paul Graham, Richard Posner, and perhaps Mike Bloomberg to have a long, meandering dinner party wherein they discuss and solve America's most impor

by portman 14y ago

I would like Paul Graham, Richard Posner, and perhaps Mike Bloomberg to have a long, meandering dinner party wherein they discuss and solve America's most important problems. It worked for Jefferson/Madison/Hamilton 222 years ago. This could be exactly what we need.

te_chris 14y ago
By the rich for the rich then? Sounds about right. Seriously though, you want 3 privileged, white men to decide the fate of your entire country? I'm all for smart people coming up with solutions, and I know your comment wasn't mean't to be taken too seriously, but this is just ridiculous. Technocracy is not the answer, no matter how much technologists would love it to be.
- nathantotten 14y ago
  The founding fathers were all privileged white men.
  - molmalo 14y ago
    And then you had almost a century of slavery... I think that he has a point in saying that if you have an heterogeneous society, it's not wise to put all the power in an homogeneous group.
    - reader5000 14y ago
      Yeah dude white people are all the same.
    - slurgfest 14y ago
      It is worth observing that slavery was not universally practiced or accepted in the US and that ending it involved, among other things, a mind-boggling pile of corpses, the suspension of habeas corpus and the near destruction of the US as a political unit. Moreover, that the great empires maintained de facto slavery in their colonies up into the 60s. So I think there is a serious lack of historical perspective when you are trying to ding the founding fathers very hard for slavery, as if they all intended it, as if this were some kind of inevitable result of putting white people in power. I like affirmative action, but I don't think it is a viable principle for determining political rights, which should be universal and colorblind rather than being denied or granted based on race or a distaste for homogeneity. The idea that white people should not have power because of their inherent moral depravity is definitely a racist idea.
- reader5000 14y ago
  I don't believe a racial attack is in any way an appropriate response to portman's comment.
  - te_chris 14y ago
    That wasn't a racial attack, it was pointing out that the 3 people who he proposed to "fix" everything were among the most privileged people on the planet (in part due to the colour of their skin). This was done to try and make the point that, given past history, another round of letting the most privileged people on the planet come up with "solutions", probably won't get us very far.
    - derleth 14y ago
      > That wasn't a racial attack You explicitly mentioned race. It's racist.
      - wpietri 14y ago
        I see. And if I point out that the KKK is all white dudes, then I'm also being racist? What a meanie I am! Pointing out the unbalanced composition of a group meant to solve society's problems is not in any way racist. It's a specific application of the general rule that humans have hard time understanding the experiences of people different than themselves, especially when there's privilege involved.
        reader5000 14y ago
        Unlike the kkk, there is no indication the OP chose the three men on account of their race. To therefore attack them on the basis of their race is an ad hominem racial assault. Furthermore, obviously the three are privileged compared to a kid born in, say, Ethiopia, but I don't see how that illegitimates them for a discussion on America.
        wpietri 14y ago
- Locke1689 14y ago
  Technocracy is not the answer Why not? Democracy doesn't seem to be so great.
  - slurgfest 14y ago
    Well, one problem is to ensure that the people making the decisions really are more knowledgeable and really can act in a disinterested way, rather than this just becoming an excuse for a full-blown power grab. Democratic power grabs, although very problematic, tend to have time limits. Another problem is getting your technocracy to be accepted. Installing it only to have it quickly overthrown is another scenario for getting a dictator.
astrodust 14y ago
The world is a far more complicated place than three people sitting around a table can solve. Remember that 222 years ago the entire country of America didn't even have the population of New Jersey and a budget smaller than most school boards.
larrys 14y ago
"solve America's most important problems." Keep in mind that whatever dream team you assemble has to have experience solving real world problems. Not sure exactly of the connection between the individuals you choose and the particular problems that need to be solved but forgetting that for a second and assuming they are qualified there are also politics to consider. It's not as if the citizens are going to authorize binding arbitration by a group of arbitrarily chosen "smart" guys.
crusso 14y ago
You referenced Mike Bloomberg in the same thought and within the same context as you did Thomas Jefferson? Thomas Jefferson's head would explode if he witnessed the dictatorial authority with which Bloomberg is attempting to control the most minute aspects of citizens' lives. Madison and Jefferson did everything they could to allow people to be free from the control of government. They would both be tremendously saddened by how our individual liberties that they worked so hard to protect have been given away to politicians and a government bureaucracy that is lunging headlong toward mediocrity and undeniable unsustainability. When Alexis de Tocqueville toured the US in the early 1800's and wrote "Democracy in America", he noted the rugged individualism and lack of trust in anything from the government and the elite. He wrote that only in America could the culture and nature of the citizenry insulate itself from the inevitable erosion of democracy, "But one also finds in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to want to bring the strong down to their level, and which reduces men to preferring equality in servitude to inequality in freedom". That America no longer exists. The slow march of government toward tyranny that Jefferson tried to warn us about passed a point of no return a long time ago.
- slurgfest 14y ago
  What do you mean by 'tyranny'? Are you referring to taxes? Since you mention tyranny and a point of no return, I suppose your solution will be to start killing people who you find to be complicit with the government? Watering the tree of liberty, etc. etc.?
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]

by portman 14y ago

te_chris 14y ago

By the rich for the rich then? Sounds about right. Seriously though, you want 3 privileged, white men to decide the fate of your entire country? I'm all for smart people coming up with solutions, and I know your comment wasn't mean't to be taken too seriously, but this is just ridiculous. Technocracy is not the answer, no matter how much technologists would love it to be.

nathantotten 14y ago
The founding fathers were all privileged white men.
- molmalo 14y ago
  And then you had almost a century of slavery... I think that he has a point in saying that if you have an heterogeneous society, it's not wise to put all the power in an homogeneous group.
  - reader5000 14y ago
    Yeah dude white people are all the same.
  - slurgfest 14y ago
    It is worth observing that slavery was not universally practiced or accepted in the US and that ending it involved, among other things, a mind-boggling pile of corpses, the suspension of habeas corpus and the near destruction of the US as a political unit. Moreover, that the great empires maintained de facto slavery in their colonies up into the 60s. So I think there is a serious lack of historical perspective when you are trying to ding the founding fathers very hard for slavery, as if they all intended it, as if this were some kind of inevitable result of putting white people in power. I like affirmative action, but I don't think it is a viable principle for determining political rights, which should be universal and colorblind rather than being denied or granted based on race or a distaste for homogeneity. The idea that white people should not have power because of their inherent moral depravity is definitely a racist idea.
reader5000 14y ago
I don't believe a racial attack is in any way an appropriate response to portman's comment.
- te_chris 14y ago
  That wasn't a racial attack, it was pointing out that the 3 people who he proposed to "fix" everything were among the most privileged people on the planet (in part due to the colour of their skin). This was done to try and make the point that, given past history, another round of letting the most privileged people on the planet come up with "solutions", probably won't get us very far.
  - derleth 14y ago
    > That wasn't a racial attack You explicitly mentioned race. It's racist.
    - wpietri 14y ago
      I see. And if I point out that the KKK is all white dudes, then I'm also being racist? What a meanie I am! Pointing out the unbalanced composition of a group meant to solve society's problems is not in any way racist. It's a specific application of the general rule that humans have hard time understanding the experiences of people different than themselves, especially when there's privilege involved.
      - reader5000 14y ago
        Unlike the kkk, there is no indication the OP chose the three men on account of their race. To therefore attack them on the basis of their race is an ad hominem racial assault. Furthermore, obviously the three are privileged compared to a kid born in, say, Ethiopia, but I don't see how that illegitimates them for a discussion on America.
        wpietri 14y ago
Locke1689 14y ago
Technocracy is not the answer Why not? Democracy doesn't seem to be so great.
- slurgfest 14y ago
  Well, one problem is to ensure that the people making the decisions really are more knowledgeable and really can act in a disinterested way, rather than this just becoming an excuse for a full-blown power grab. Democratic power grabs, although very problematic, tend to have time limits. Another problem is getting your technocracy to be accepted. Installing it only to have it quickly overthrown is another scenario for getting a dictator.

astrodust 14y ago

The world is a far more complicated place than three people sitting around a table can solve. Remember that 222 years ago the entire country of America didn't even have the population of New Jersey and a budget smaller than most school boards.

larrys 14y ago

"solve America's most important problems." Keep in mind that whatever dream team you assemble has to have experience solving real world problems. Not sure exactly of the connection between the individuals you choose and the particular problems that need to be solved but forgetting that for a second and assuming they are qualified there are also politics to consider. It's not as if the citizens are going to authorize binding arbitration by a group of arbitrarily chosen "smart" guys.

crusso 14y ago

You referenced Mike Bloomberg in the same thought and within the same context as you did Thomas Jefferson? Thomas Jefferson's head would explode if he witnessed the dictatorial authority with which Bloomberg is attempting to control the most minute aspects of citizens' lives. Madison and Jefferson did everything they could to allow people to be free from the control of government. They would both be tremendously saddened by how our individual liberties that they worked so hard to protect have been given away to politicians and a government bureaucracy that is lunging headlong toward mediocrity and undeniable unsustainability. When Alexis de Tocqueville toured the US in the early 1800's and wrote "Democracy in America", he noted the rugged individualism and lack of trust in anything from the government and the elite. He wrote that only in America could the culture and nature of the citizenry insulate itself from the inevitable erosion of democracy, "But one also finds in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to want to bring the strong down to their level, and which reduces men to preferring equality in servitude to inequality in freedom". That America no longer exists. The slow march of government toward tyranny that Jefferson tried to warn us about passed a point of no return a long time ago.

slurgfest 14y ago
What do you mean by 'tyranny'? Are you referring to taxes? Since you mention tyranny and a point of no return, I suppose your solution will be to start killing people who you find to be complicit with the government? Watering the tree of liberty, etc. etc.?
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]