When the aliens stop trifling with crop circles, bumpkin abduction, and indelicate probes and finally introduce themselves to the rest of humanity, will they turn out to be partisans of central planning, interventionism, or unhampered markets?
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
So… will the extraterrestrials be Ferengi?August 16th, 2015 |
 43 comments to So… will the extraterrestrials be Ferengi? |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Free markets and private property.
Otherwise their civilisation would not have lasted long enough for them to get here.
One of the (many) irritating things about modern culture is the assumption that in serious situations the state (the collective) should control the economy.
Post terrible-invent-X societies always have collective ownership of production and people being told what to do – the only choice presented being is the collectivism democratic or dictatorship.
Non collectivism is never even considered.
If this culture continues, our civilisation (our species) will not be going to other star systems.
Civilisation being a state of existence in which one’s relations to others have been made or become ‘civil’, i.e. peaceful.
For humans, yes, but is there any reason why the alien mind should not be like that of the ant, or the fictional Borg, putting the collective first?
To put it another way, is the human rejection of collectivism as a way of life (for those who suffer and/or can think about it freely and are not brutes to their fellow men) an aspect of our being destined to search for ‘utility’ in our actions? Under socialism, you are constantly denied not only utility that you might wish to seek, but also the right to seek it. Neither life, liberty nor the pursuit of happiness on your own terms is possible under collectivism.
The search for utility is really unavoidable in a choosing being. To go against it is actually to select a path conferring greater utility but through a perverse satisfaction. Hence the arguments against free will perhaps? If no one has free will, no one may seek utility, as it is a false consciousness on those terms.
The premise is faulty.
The aliens we get here are the intoxicated, stupid, loser aliens who wandered into our backwoods and had some fun with the hillbillies. The mainstream aliens have no interest in us at all.
I see that Fred Z is spreading anti-alien alarmist propaganda, I wonder why…?
“WAAAAAIT!
It’s a COOKBOOK!!!”
Unhampered markets, definitely, as seen in “They Live”.
“They Live” was hilarious 😀
I’ve read a lot of science fiction and I can imagine some fairly weird aliens. One problem is even us humans achieve some sort of economic growth with some amount of interventionism. So given enough time even a low rate of progress (or low average rate of progress in a sequence of booms and collapses) could result in interstellar travel.
I can see an argument that in a straight race the free-est aliens will cross the stars first. But I can also imagine super-intelligent hive minds or a symbiosis between numerous, dumb, strong aliens and a small number of weak but clever ones, or self-replicating robots run amok.
The real question is, since the aliens are already here but have not chosen to reveal themselves yet, why are they letting us continue to suffer?
Rob, it’s because they’re our reptilian overlords. They’re very much into personal profit, they just don’t want to share any more of it than they have to with the indigenous species.
I want to read a first contact story with aliens who think we’re all disgusting communists.
Having said that, our redistributionism is weird. Real collectives require everyone to pull their weight.
I think it was Steven White who wrote a book about a first contact, set in the near future, when Washington was going to be rededicated to Martha, as George Washington was too much of a war-monger. The aliens are free-enterprize types, so Washington wants nothing to do with them.
My guess would be that these would be Government probes, as these seem like scientific investigations. Don’t forget that governments often sponsor major investigations. Can you say ‘Captain Cook was financed by the British Government.’? so, if these were real, or turn out to be real, i’ll go with science geeks experimenting on a new life-form.
There was Larry Niven story titled “The Fourth Profession”, about aliens arriving in a light-sail powered trading vessel. The gimmick of the story was that the aliens, called “Monks”, wanted humanity to build a “launching laser” to give them a boost out of the solar system and on their way to their next port of call. The kicker was that if we wouldn’t build a launching laser, they would leave on their own – and then cause our Sun to go nova, figuring that if we weren’t interested in trade now, we probably never would be.
For years, I’ve been advocating GUS, Gray’s Universal Standards. SETI is using hydrogen wavelengths as a common radio setting, so why not build a measurement system around the commonest, which is 21cm, or 8+1/4 inches? (Aliens might, just might, not think that Earth-based standards are universal. Who could have known?)
And that background temperature could be the start of a degree system. Water melts at 99 of these degrees, and boils at 135.
Freeze hydrogen, and a cube of 21cm sides has a mass of 1.66kg.
Any alien should know this stuff, so why don’t we all use it?
Free markets and private property.
Otherwise their civilisation would not have lasted long enough for them to get here.
“Strong” socialism fails because of human nature — people are not willing to work hard while other free-load.
In theory we would all be better off if we all worked together. And for small enough groups, such as families, we do actually work collectively pooling our money and sharing our property. Indeed most people raise our children with little or no expectation of getting our efforts rewarded in any monetary sense.
It’s only with large groups that shared resources don’t work, and the theory is defeated because while most people are reasonable, a sizable enough percentage are lazy and/or dishonest.
But we can pretty much predict aliens don’t have human nature. Perhaps they are all willing to work for the collective good, free-loading being against their nature, so don’t need private property.
In fact we can pretty much assert that in order to reach across the stars aliens must be able to work together in meaningful ways, with no short term end in sight. It’s complete atomisation that would prevent civilisation, not collectivism.
Then there is Dark City, in which our planet, and we humans, are taken over by the remnants of an Alien Civilization who indeed are Hive-minded, which means that as their numbers diminish so does the power of their shared mind.
The situation is desperate! To save themselves, they conclude that they must develop the capacity to operate as individuals, as these strange Humans do. So their plan is to experiment with us as the lab rats, so to speak, in the hope that they can figure out how to develop our non-Hive, individual minds in their own species. This involves mucking about with our brains, natch.
Dark, yes. Very dark.
I saw Dark City, but I thought it was about a space-ship which had been lost between stars, and the life-forms were curious about earthlings, and what they could do. Earth would be safe because these strangers couldn’t stand sunlight.
“In theory we would all be better off if we all worked together.” I’m not sure about this. It could mean that we do not try enough different things, so fail to discover ways to do things better.
“while most people are reasonable, a sizable enough percentage are lazy and/or dishonest” It’s not this, either. It’s that people don’t want to make *extra* effort without *extra* reward. So the amount of effort ratchets downwards as people realise that neither making more or less effort makes any difference.
I would say free market. But, I see no reason to expect the aliens to think we are good enough to participate. No one asks baboons for mineral rights to their land.
“Mental Socialism” Ed.
What Kim Philby (and others) thought they had overcome (at least in theory) by making people think of others before themselves.
Actually it misses the point – large scale collectivism does not work because people are “selfish”, that is not the reason at all – it-does-not-work because it-does-not-work.
As you know it is a matter of basic reasoning.
Still to return to the post.
Look at the portrayal of the “Ferengi” that is how those who control so much of Western culture think of business people – and how they seek to make the young think of business people.
“Are you saying that Star Trek dooms civilisation”.
No certainly not – but the attitudes behind it (and a million other things) do.
Unless these attitudes (these principles) are defeated we are indeed doomed (TM).
This is the real “Culture War”.
It is not about people being willing to work hard for others – or about people free loading.
It is nothing that a change in attitudes or even the most skilful brainwashing (“education”) can overcome.
It is a basic design flaw in large scale collectivism – regardless of the motivations of the people involved.
That is why the left will lose – even if they win.
They may well (as Barack Obama and the rest of the “liberal” elite, desire) destroy civilisation – but they will not get the new civilisation emerging out of the ashes.
Instead of the wonderful society they expect to emerge from the ashes, all they will get is the ashes.
And dried blood.
Star Trek aliens (Vulcans) supposed that a civilisation was ready to deal with if it had advanced propulsion (Warp) technology. I suggest a better criteria for bothering with an inferior civilisation would be the dominance of Randian ethics, because unless and until a civilisation is committed deep-down to living independently rather than freeloading off the strongest, then why would the aliens want to volunteer for that role?
Before he lost his marbles Christopher Buckley wrote a wonderful book “Little Green Men” where the aliens worked for the US Social Security Administration.
Paul,
The first question is are the Ferengi actually genuinely free-market? Recall the rules of acquisition? The were intended in Star Trek NG to be the real baddies but this didn’t work out because they looked so farcical so you get Q and all the rest. Anyway, back to the original question. They seem to be very much state-sanctioned actors. Possibly this is because the creators of STNG couldn’t imagine anything else. But essentially they are about as free-market as Germany under the Kaiser. Of course the economics of Startrek are very odd. But… explicable. When Jean-Luc can get his “Earl Grey, Black” materialising out of the replicator then clearly there is the tech and energy to probably make money obsolete. Certainly in a way Charles, Earl Grey on his column in my hometown would not fathom. So, oddly enough in the STNG utopia the lack of money sort of makes sense within it’s own context.
But… How doable is that context. If SF reflects us more than the future it is ridiculous. I assume, up to a point, the creators had the idea because the episode “Jean-Luc boils a kettle” was deemed to dull to film. Is it trying to say something about us, or how we ought to be. Yes. Is that a ludicrous white-washing of the “electricity too cheap to meter” insanity of assorted Panglosian socialists of all strips from Lenin to Corbyn and all points between. And a few “liberals” and “Tories” as well.
Can I suggest a question and an answer which I think is more pertinent than just saying “socialism doesn’t work”? I have just bought by Paypal and download Sid Meier’s “Pirates” (most recent version). This was a transaction that a generation or two back would be inconceivable. My point here (an aside) is that what money is used for changes over time. Also the value of things does. I paid GBP 5.99 for a bunch of 1s and 0s in a way which would have baffled my Grandad. The point is – and I find this a bark a lot of people don’t think these new informational commodities are worth that much. I find it a bark because they undervalue my skill because it doesn’t involve something tangible. It might be something dead useful but that isn’t the same as an item. Perhaps in a way that relates to J-L’s tea.
Anyway the pertinent question is not whether socialism works or why it doesn’t but why people believe in it. I think I have a partial answer. It came to me in the very early ’90s in Czechoslovakia – just after the fall of the Berlin Wall. At a roadside cafe owned by the Czech State version of the RAC I had arguably the worst meal served ever. It was very cheap (about 75p per person for three courses with unlimited OJ). The food was dreadful beyond measure but the OJ was about the best I have had before or since. My point is communism/socialism/whateverism does the overwhelming majority of things terribly but one or two things very well. Perhaps they’d had a people’s commissar for orange juice who was brilliant or signed a great deal with… Cuba?
This is the thing. This is the nub (I almost said the “bone and gristle” but I was recalling that soup from a quarter of a century ago). It is those few things done well that some people (not I) latch onto and think can be rolled out across the board. Let’s put it even more bluntly. The Soviets/Russians have quite a track record in space. They did that well. Could they make a car though? Or enough cars? Towards the end of the SU I read that 1/3 TVs they made was faulty before it left the factory. It is a case of not seeing the wood for a particular beautiful tree. The other 999,999 trees in the wood might be gnarled and nasty and have Gollums hiding behind them but people do have perception filters. They just see that single gorgeous oak. Moreover they think that if the system can do that with one thing then why not the rest?
This is a mentality like me occasionally drawing a straight flush in poker and conveniently forgetting all the times I got a pair of 7s and had to fold. And of course this is the road to the workhouse if you don’t realise.
Of course this is all helped by the disturbingly common belief that communism was meant to be “nice” as oppsed to fascism which was always “nasty”. That is another common flaw of thought. Just because the two had a ding-dong doesn’t mean one had to be essentially good and the other evil. evil people can have a barney with each other as well you know! Baddies can (and often do) fight baddies. I mean this isn’t Die Hard or Bond or whatever where there is always a goodie and a baddy.
The official position of USSR about space aliens was that developed space civilisation must be fully communist, because the Marx’s laws of history are universal laws of nature, valid for all space and time.
All the debate about space aliens reminds me of one medieval story.
Saint Thomas Aquinas was once asked, whether dog headed people living in the far east of Asia have souls. He answered: I will deal with the question once i meet one of them.
Darin: That’s sublime! LOLOL
Roue le Jour, the book is ‘Eagle against the Stars’ by Steve White. If we can get the book here in Australia (and we can) then you should have no trouble.
Thanks, NG, It’s on Kindle so I’ll give it a look.
Any other suggests gratefully received. I’m guess really looking for something like a humanoid version of Iain Bank’s Dwellers.
If you have the wherewithal to throw yourself around the galaxy then resource scarcity probably isn’t a big problem for you. If there’s a market it’ll be for externalities, positional goods and luxuries. At least there’ll have to be private property if there’s going to be Coasean bargaining.
They might be anthropologists documenting our amusing primitive superstitions. “And then the sky burns and falls in great flaming chunks? Is that it?” “So nuclear power is fobiden, like, taboo?” “These, windmills, do they have some religious significance? Like prayer wheels?” “And all these people supported at public expense, are they holy in some way?”
Location scouts maybe. “Drax and Tana will run though here and jump in a biplane, Jano chases them in a submarine. And all you monkeys in the background, can you do that cute thing you do with your comms devices?”
If you want a serious answer to the question:
If our aliens haven’t arrived in some sort of multigenerational ark & do have FTL, then certain things follow:
They really will have cracked the energy problem. Unlimited & essentially costless. What you’d get if you abolished e=mc2
Energy is substitutable for anything, so the implication is free “stuff”, as much as you can eat, for all.
In which case, economics, in the sense being discussed, ceases to exist.
Yes, probably all ‘economics’ would revolve around intangibles.
BiG
I was being serious. Ish. It is energy + information that is substitutable for anything. You have the power, so what you want is data.
Anyway the pertinent question is not whether socialism works or why it doesn’t but why people believe in it.
The reason is because capitalism depends on people being greedy, whereas socialism depends on people being generous, and the latter sounds so much better, except you can always guarantee people will be greedy to some extent (not necessarily taking from others but through self-interest), whereas you can’t guarantee the same with generosity under socialism, so you have to “force” people to be “generous”, and because by then you’ve sold into the hippy-trippy dream world that a collective society pretends to be, you start to ignore the “force” and just pretend you have freedom, and then it suddenly becomes better than capitalism, because, you know, we’re not all being greedy and nasty.
Back to Star Trek, the episode “The Neutral Zone” partially covered the attitude towards property in a society where transporter/replicator technology is common, the need for money and wealth are pointless pursuits. But Star Trek still addresses human needs and wants, which seem to be largely interpersonal desires, the power (and responsibility) of command for example. However, the intelligence required to replicate yourself a shirt colour other than red to continue your survival seems to have been overlooked.
FTL need not imply the abolition of E=MCC. Einstein came up with the concept of wormholes in space-time, and some people have pointed out (Alcuberie) that space-time could expand faster than light, all within relativity. My own theory of wave-width, mentioned a few months back, would have retained the whole relativity set-up, but had ships change the size of their particles, and thus change their frame of reference so they could handle tachyons, though their speeded-up energies meant they would only perceive them as light-particles.
So FTL would not mean the end of Relativity, or E=MCC.
@RlJ
“It is energy + information that is substitutable for anything.”
Too true.
But most of economics is about the movement of “stuff” from locations of lower to locations of higher value, or matters peripheral to that activity.
Information’s different. You can sell information, but you still possess the information & can sell it again. You can see how this fundamentally changes economics, in the endless arguments over IP.
Something to think on: Anyone who creates knows that one gains more in return for their creation than mere money. There’s the personal satisfaction of others enjoying & valuing the fruits of their endeavors. For a second order, there’s the increase in status amongst their peers, this has happened & is acknowledged to have happened. Why those who have reaped material reward from their creation, far beyond their needs, continue to create. (Hence: “money’s only a way of keeping score”.) Both of these will still be in limited supply.
Can you build an economy on this? Can you arbitrage esteem?
BiS
I mentioned the Dwellers whose economy works exactly like that, running on ‘kudos’.
Once raw materials aren’t a problem then culture becomes capital. Consider Victorian interest in Japan and later ancient Egypt for example. I like the idea of an alien building a holiday home in the style of ancient Rome, because why not? It’s this year’s fashion.
Data is what they will want from us, everything we can tell them about life on Earth and what we have created.
That’s going to depend on how the Drake equation resolves, isn’t it? If it’s a fairly small number, then we have novelty value. If large, who’ll be interested in yet another backwater civilisation, couldn’t hack even getting a respectable amount of their lazy arses of their own planet? The market for comparative bronze age cultural reminisces might be saturated.
But you’re only describing an economy with one of the participants at the exchanging Manhattan Island for a string of beads stage. What’s their economy like? Do they have one?
“I mentioned the Dwellers whose economy works exactly like that, running on ‘kudos’.”
Jack Vance explored this in a short story. “Moon Moth” The quality of kudos was “strakh”. The creator of an item would give it to an individual with sufficient strakh because they were deemed worthy of it. And the creator’s strakh was enhanced because a person of such high strakh had accepted it. Because the acceptor would only accept a gift from one with high enough strakh. The sum of strakh, for both parties, is increased.
Trouble is, it’s a self reinforcing loop. There’s little opportunity to graduate from low strakh to higher strakh. It’s a highly stratified society. And probably not going anywhere. Too much of a brake on innovation.
We already have rewards and medals and citations in our societies, so something like kudos might be the next step, but it will not replace the old society, it will blossom within it. Just as the Industrial Revolution did not do away with agriculture, but lessened its’ direct influence, so changes will simply add to what is already there. Evolution, not Revolution!
“We already have rewards and medals and citations in our societies”
And inflation in those has been running at….? It’s getting hard to find people who haven’t got one. Look at the total shower of shite makes up Her Britannic Maj’s honours list.