3 ms·

Can we drop the "tech" prefix from our neo-feudalism? Technology is necessarily a progressive force, and feudalism is necessarily a stagnatory conservative str

Can we drop the "tech" prefix from our neo-feudalism? Technology is necessarily a progressive force, and feudalism is necessarily a stagnatory conservative structure. The "Tech Supremacy" group is visibly opposed to technology, and it's reflecting more and more on society as they gain power.

vacuity 2y ago
> Technology is necessarily a progressive force Technology is a tool. It is not a culture or a system. In fact, I think state and corporate use of technology for things like surveillance, censorship, frankly pointless jobs that somehow attract VC money, mass propaganda and social media access, data tracking and advertising and behavior modelling to a T, hypothetical pointless-job-destroying-AGI, etc. that are currently in vogue are part of the conservative structure. Technology means moving, but is this outwards or inwards movement?
- marcosdumay 2y ago
  Conservative people just can't create technology. Technology is always progressive. It can be progressive towards any amount of things, good or bad. But conservatism requires not developing it.
  - KittenInABox 2y ago
    I think this is conflating conservatism as a political position and conservatism as an anti-development position. Conservatism as a political position has very little to do with actual developmental changes and way more to do with retaining existing political hierarchies. If a new tool came into existence to enforce a existing caste systems (race, class, whatever) then political conservatism would be for this tool. Consider reading Rabbit Test by Samantha Mills as a great display of this difference in the context of reproductive rights[0]. https://www.uncannymagazine.com/article/rabbit-test/ https://www.uncannymagazine.com/article/rabbit-test/
    - marcosdumay 2y ago
      > I think this is conflating conservatism as a political position and conservatism as an anti-development position. In absolutely no place in either comment I mentioned political movements, parties, or anything like that.
      - KittenInABox 2y ago
        Well yes, the term conservatism is ambiguous as it means different things in different contexts. I'm suggesting you're conflating this.
      - zytron3 2y ago
        Your own introduction of the term was alongside feudalism, which most would say is "something like" a political movement
alsoforgotmypwd 2y ago
No, because it's enabled by the tech industry and tech figures. It's not big pharma or big oil that has anywhere near as much lobbying power or money.
- marcosdumay 2y ago
  So... "tech industry" is the name we give to the companies investing heavily on stopping technological improvements? And yes, I know that it is. It's just, can we drop the Orwellianism and change the name?

vacuity 2y ago

> Technology is necessarily a progressive force Technology is a tool. It is not a culture or a system. In fact, I think state and corporate use of technology for things like surveillance, censorship, frankly pointless jobs that somehow attract VC money, mass propaganda and social media access, data tracking and advertising and behavior modelling to a T, hypothetical pointless-job-destroying-AGI, etc. that are currently in vogue are part of the conservative structure. Technology means moving, but is this outwards or inwards movement?

marcosdumay 2y ago
Conservative people just can't create technology. Technology is always progressive. It can be progressive towards any amount of things, good or bad. But conservatism requires not developing it.
- KittenInABox 2y ago
  I think this is conflating conservatism as a political position and conservatism as an anti-development position. Conservatism as a political position has very little to do with actual developmental changes and way more to do with retaining existing political hierarchies. If a new tool came into existence to enforce a existing caste systems (race, class, whatever) then political conservatism would be for this tool. Consider reading Rabbit Test by Samantha Mills as a great display of this difference in the context of reproductive rights[0]. https://www.uncannymagazine.com/article/rabbit-test/ https://www.uncannymagazine.com/article/rabbit-test/
  - marcosdumay 2y ago
    > I think this is conflating conservatism as a political position and conservatism as an anti-development position. In absolutely no place in either comment I mentioned political movements, parties, or anything like that.
    - KittenInABox 2y ago
      Well yes, the term conservatism is ambiguous as it means different things in different contexts. I'm suggesting you're conflating this.
    - zytron3 2y ago
      Your own introduction of the term was alongside feudalism, which most would say is "something like" a political movement

alsoforgotmypwd 2y ago

No, because it's enabled by the tech industry and tech figures. It's not big pharma or big oil that has anywhere near as much lobbying power or money.

marcosdumay 2y ago
So... "tech industry" is the name we give to the companies investing heavily on stopping technological improvements? And yes, I know that it is. It's just, can we drop the Orwellianism and change the name?