Some stuff seems just too stupid to comment on, but a number of bizarre public behaviors in recent months highlight the fact that really stupid stuff has an audience, in spite or perhaps because of the stupidity, and that it may sometimes be worthwhile to belabor the obvious. So, consider these archaic ideas that are still being touted as prescriptions for current policy:

1. We need to communicate to everyone in the world a new story of our planet's destiny, showing them a better way to live than our bankrupt and ruinous 'civilization' way.
2. We need to achieve a huge consensus that overpopulation and overconsumption are the two root causes underlying all the problems we face today, and agree on deadlines and targets for correcting them.
3. We need to organize six billion people to use their collective wisdom to tell us how to meet these deadlines and targets, and then free them to work in their communities to make it happen.
4. We need to help each other clear away obstacles to success. That means a lot of humanitarian and peacemaking assistance, helping to build new infrastructure that will work in the new community-based world, redistributing resources from the rich to the poor, and disarming those that will try to establish new wealth and power hierarchies.

1. No, we don't need to communicate to anyone, they can communicate with one another and be light years ahead. If there is any wisp of wisdom that penetrates the dull minds of paleo-authoritarians it should be this bit. They know more than we do and more than we can know.
2. Consensus is the last thing needed. It causes information cascades which dumb down groups and then locks them into dumb behaviors since dissent is discouraged and punished. Both overpopulation and overconsumption are articles of faith for modern hair-shirt luddites but there is neither credible evidence nor theories to support their beliefs. At every point in history there have been problems providing material necessities for all, and though the number of humans grows ever larger the number in need grows ever smaller.
3. No, we don't need to organize anyone. Wisdom disappears when groups are "organized". They don't need to tell us anything, indeed they can't since the volume of information vastly exceeds the amount that can be collected or processed.
4. The whole idea of an authoritarian hegemon with the power to redistribute material resources and disarm dissenters is repulsive. Worse, it has already been tried and failed miserably by every measure. It can't be done and it would cause untold misery and hardship to try... again.

There are very few opportunities for useful intervention in socio-economic evolution that can be taken by centralized powers. In every case they are modest, pragmatic, and short term stimuli designed to smooth a transition already in progress. For example, if maniacs like the one quoted above ever manage to assemble a mob it would be useful to oppose it.

The primitive idea of central control is based on a family fiction, a sense that there is a family boss, or a tribal leader, or even a king or parliament to wield power and decide. It is fictitious since there have always been many, many such social units. Some implode or explode, others endure or evolve, but none become singular. In the wildly improbable event that this ever happened it would be quickly followed by collapse and fragmentation since it is a hideously unstable configuration. It's insane to put all your eggs in one basket.

Though these ideas seem too stupid and antiquated to refute the fact that they are still advocated raises the remote specter of them gaining sufficient believers to do real harm. It's like the flu which is always with us, and though it usually just makes us miserable for a few days an epidemic can cause major death and destruction. It's at once both mundane and dire, the sort of problem that can't be completely neglected.

Those who think small and cling to obsolete world views make no useful contribution to society except perhaps to serve as a counter-example; look what happens when you neglect your studies and wallow in superstition. The problems that make them lose their mud and thrash hysterically are real, but we must be calm, clear eyed and productive to weather them.

Is population growth a problem? You bet. It will take a lot of doing to feed and educate so many people but it takes a lot to do so now. There will be more of us to do the work as well as more work to be done. More importantly it isn't an endless expansion. The rate of growth has been in decline for decades and the peak is in sight. No draconian measures are required since people are quite capable of making choices when they have good information. Now that fewer die in youth fewer need to be born to maintain societies.

Is consumption a problem? No, it is exactly the opposite. As consumption and material well being increases so does education, longevity, environmental awareness, and mindful living. People facing the prospect of long and comfortable lives aren't so thrilled about the prospect of littering much less war. If knowledge was static and we still used primitive methods to produce goods, and those goods had little value beyond the material used, the task of provisioning all would be daunting. But knowledge isn't static, methods improve remarkably, and the knowledge content of goods is rising ever higher so that in time it will be the overwhelming majority of what is consumed.

Knowledge is not diminished by consumption. As we come ever closer to the SF fantasy of cornucopia machines, "Drexlers" for everyone, the ability to form and reform dollops of mass into whatever we require, the very idea of overconsumption simply dissolves. Even the energy needed to do these miracles declines compared to what we use now to do very much less. This won't happen by tomorrow afternoon and there are many trying times ahead of us as we learn how to live well and long, but it won't happen at all if the authoritarians gain the control they seek.

» Platonic Despots from Crumb Trail
A recent M&M rant, Doofus Alert, did a bit of spelunking in the wacko fringes, a typically unrewarding activity since the denizens of the deep fringes and their ideas evolved beyond the reach of sunshine and can't survive the light of day. John A. Bad......[read more]
Tracked: September 29, 2004 08:53 PM