4 ms·

Why do you think once "we level up on technology and education and outperform these assholes", we will not become assholes ourselves? Tangentially related, but

by sid6376 13y ago

Why do you think once "we level up on technology and education and outperform these assholes", we will not become assholes ourselves? Tangentially related, but this[1] is one of my favorite articles from Less Wrong. A quote from that article "The young revolutionary's belief is honest. There will be no betraying catch in his throat, as he explains why the tribe is doomed at the hands of the old and corrupt, unless he is given power to set things right. Not even subconsciously does he think, 'And then, once I obtain power, I will strangely begin to resemble that old corrupt guard, abusing my power to increase my inclusive genetic fitness.'" [1] http://lesswrong.com/lw/uu/why_does_power_corrupt/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/uu/why_does_power_corrupt/

michaelochurch 13y ago
This is my main reason for preferring to do it nonviolently (Avenue 1). We need to be building things that give power to the currently powerless and decentralize control, not the other way around. If we take power "for ourselves", we find that what we call "ourselves" is infiltrated by the worst kinds of people, and then they push us out. I don't have any moral problem with killing the current global elite. For what they've done to this world, they're effectively our property, to do with what we wish. That said, I prefer to offer them full amnesty so long as they decline peacefully. (They'll even remain fairly wealthy; just not dominant anymore.) Even if it's abstractly morally acceptable, there is a major moral cost to violence nonetheless. Once we start it, how do we stop it? Also, violent revolutions tend to draw in the worst people (who are attracted, as noted, by the power). Our side is 99.9% of the world; not everyone in that set is good. Best is a nonviolent revolution centered on decentralization of power (giving power away to the currently powerless in order to build a healthier and more robust world) because the sorts of people who are attracted to such a movement are the kinds you want. When you start killing people and blowing shit up and "ruling" old-style (see what happened to communism) then you are taking power (perhaps with the stated intention of giving it back some day) and you get a lot of mercenary assholes in your effort who don't really care about the ideals and just want to cause harm.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]

by sid6376 13y ago

michaelochurch 13y ago

This is my main reason for preferring to do it nonviolently (Avenue 1). We need to be building things that give power to the currently powerless and decentralize control, not the other way around. If we take power "for ourselves", we find that what we call "ourselves" is infiltrated by the worst kinds of people, and then they push us out. I don't have any moral problem with killing the current global elite. For what they've done to this world, they're effectively our property, to do with what we wish. That said, I prefer to offer them full amnesty so long as they decline peacefully. (They'll even remain fairly wealthy; just not dominant anymore.) Even if it's abstractly morally acceptable, there is a major moral cost to violence nonetheless. Once we start it, how do we stop it? Also, violent revolutions tend to draw in the worst people (who are attracted, as noted, by the power). Our side is 99.9% of the world; not everyone in that set is good. Best is a nonviolent revolution centered on decentralization of power (giving power away to the currently powerless in order to build a healthier and more robust world) because the sorts of people who are attracted to such a movement are the kinds you want. When you start killing people and blowing shit up and "ruling" old-style (see what happened to communism) then you are taking power (perhaps with the stated intention of giving it back some day) and you get a lot of mercenary assholes in your effort who don't really care about the ideals and just want to cause harm.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]