What a joy to listen to! I have long resisted institutions and remained a club of one but this is group I would willingly be a part of. Sarah communicates so easily some of these really complex ideas and makes it all - well, so normal!
I really liked the concert analogy she used to explain Moloch theory. Couldn't help diving down that avenue and thinking about life being the concert and the wealthy occupying all the front seats and when they stand up the rest of us don't get to see life much so they need to sit down first to allow the rest of us to do the same. But they're not going to do that and we realise that maybe the concert we're at isn't really life - just what the advertisers told us was life. So, time to make our own music and create a life that isn't mediated by business and the politics of power. Together!
Thanks Sarah - I have a little mind-liberating to do.... I'm half way through your e-book which is helping me feel less lonely by the page. I'm also a big fan of Iain McGilchrist and re-reading the Matter With Things - with notes!
As expected, a very nice foray through collapse thinking with two of my favourite substackers. Good to get name checks and discussion of Tainter, Molloch, game theory, hopium etc. I'd have liked a bit more on the complexity and systems theory material, rather than the tech-bros, but it's all relevant, and the anxieties and fantasies of the tech-bros that are driving the world certainly warrant repeatedly airing. I tend to advocate "hate the game, not the player" (although it’s legitimate to hate both) as the crimes of Musk, Thiel and their ilk is simply to have been selected for or captured by the values of the systems or “game” that we inhabit (and "winning" at those values).
On the game-front, I find myself resisting the D&D point made by Sarah. While Musk certainly uses RPG & D&D teminology in very problematic, invidious and revealing ways, describing his opponents as NPCs. He seems to represent only a sub-set of gamers, notably the “powergamers” (who like to simply amass power, level-up and treat everything as obstacle to be overcome). In contrast, much of RPG & D&D culture is better represented as collaborative story-telling, which has a quite different ethos and set of values.
What seems to be missing from Musk and other tech-bros and oligarchs is the Mitchell & Webb possibility or epiphany, when they might ask the question “are we the baddies?” Or rather, in D&D/RPG terms, am I actually the “boss monster” or “big bad” that is destroying or enslaving the world. Sadly that moment of clarity or capacity to de-centre oneself, and see things from another PoV, seems to be lacking. I guess everyone only tends to see themselves as the hero in their own RPG.
Well there are good and bad uses of gamification. It's a little tricky with Musk as he uses D&D-like language quite a lot, dismissing anyone in his way as a Non-Player Character. Plus, he considers it quite likely that the world is a simulation, which tends to provide him with a rather solipsistic rationale for thinking he is currently in a game which he is trying to win. Great work on the book, by the way.
I was unsure who was being targeted in the criticism about bros and "word salads". It's not just bros who engage in conversations that introduce challenging concepts about the meta-crisis, this podcast being one example. Isn't that what helps us all form some sort of understanding? There was at least a 'word garnish' in this episode for example.
I've lost count of the number of times that I've listened to this and other channels, where what the interviewee is suggesting sounds like Transition Towns. @Rachel, did you ever try getting Rob Hopkins on Planet Critical?
Hey Tim, not sure I understand. Sarah’s criticism of the tech bros was related to the ideologies they’re building technology systems with which affect us all.
Here’s an idea “that’s been laying around” since well before 1950 when Einstein described it as “…the only way out”.
World United will soon launch a global, nonviolent grassroots movement to establish a properly democratic World Federation of, by, and for the people—with the power to enact and enforce laws to end war, halt climate change, and control AI.
Not a League of Nations, not a United Nations, but rather a United Peoples.
It’s a big, bold undertaking–the most difficult thing we will ever accomplish, and it is both absolutely necessary and not nearly as impossible as it sounds. It’s the answer to the question, “What can I do?”
You can unite with your fellow humans to take back the planet. Please let me know what you think!
As you say, this is an old idea, one that I think has merit.
My 2cents...
I think that it could take off if hundreds of influential and respected thinkers from all corners of the world came on board, got involved and spoke out in support.
Have you looked at bioregionalism, r3-0.org, Earth Regnerators, Dana Meadows, Joe Brewer, Daniel Christian Wahl, etc. Lots of amazingly elegant process.
you might be interested in Tyson Yunkaporta (Sand Talk) who looks at selfishness in what he labels narcissism and the need for thousands of years of human civilization to maintain the checks and balance - checks that can be wiped out in one generation of colonialism. As he put it , "The Sumerians invented it (moloch/ Hamurabi) the Romans perfected it, the anglosphere inherited and the rest of us are mired in it".
I enjoyed this, thank you both! When Sarah bought up 'the prisoners dilemma' I was hoping you might discuss the work of Elinor Ostrom, the first female economist to win the 'Nobel prize', and whose life's work on the Commons was a refutation of this theory and Hardins 'tragedy of the commons'. Elinor was using game theory before those tech bros were even born early (and looked after by a whole ecosystem of care!) The book, Elinor Ostroms Rules for Radicals, is a super introduction - he can be someone to talk to about her work.
By the early 2030's we will reach catastrophic tipping points which will mean mass migration and extinction events. See the Jerry Kroth Video on Youtube. XR wants to organise a collaboration when they themselves are hardly an organised organisation but do have a conference coming up. What we should be doing is helping ourselves and communities to prepare for survival and resilience. One of the big mistakes activist make and continue to make is avoid the matter of what type of progressive socio-economic system do we want. Its way worse scenario than being described here by the main talker. https://www.joboneforhumanity.org/an_informed_opinion_of_the_current_climate_emergency
She talks too fast and yet says nothing much other than chicken little stuff and endless tree hugging and gets all the science wrong or makes it fit the fatalist narrative such as catastrophic climate change that she wants to see happen.
We used to call this stuff old wives tales.. now its mainstream and its like a boil on the ass of our modern western society.
There is no understanding of real human nature as we are tribal and apply survival of the fittest when the chips are down.
It’s a dangerous narrative that is destroying the goals of our children who must not be exposed to this crap.
The suggested solutions are 180 degrees from where we are headed.. we tried hi powered multilateralism and it’s a fail ….so its back to nation centric solutions.
I guess it’s the new religion and far more dangerous than the others.
The good news is most people disregard this stuff and get on with life… And we will soon wake up and come to our senses and correct our bad policies such as NetZero and the woke nonsense.
There was much to enjoy here, thank you. Unless I missed something, it seems the subject of collapse only came up near the end of the talk. When Sarah said she focuses her hope not on avoiding collapse, (if I got that right) but on preparing for a better or simpler life post collapse, I have to wonder what she thinks humanity will be able to salvage in that situation. As things are going, humanity has no hope of survival. This is not an issue of mere adaptation. Climate scientists do not like discussing this and will even deny that our extinction is at stake, but there can be no other conclusion in a world likely to reach 3C of warming before 2100, no matter how much they need to keep their jobs and avoid speaking in such clear terms. She said humanity won't change, or at least not until pushed, or forced. If that push only comes considerably further down the road, like close to or after 2050, I don't think our chances of surviving the collapse are realistic.
I don’t understand the use of Substack and other computer technology media to talk about collapse. One of the biggest institutional users of planet-killing fossil fuels, besides the US military, are the data centers located all across the globe. All Substack posts and podcast distributions are forms of burning immense quantities of CO2-emitting fossil fuels like natural gas, coal, oil.
The irony comes in as a huge sludge here - if what is being “communicated” is some concern about the Climatastrophe, surely the means of the communication adding untold molecules of CO2 to that emissions increase needs a disclaimer, or at least an acknowledgement like our common “Land Acknowledgment.” Sure, no one’s personal carbon emissions are the deciding factor in humanity’s ecological non-future, but have you ever seen data center in photos? Do you know that arch-idiot Marc Andreesen was an early investor in Substack? Does hypocrisy never need to be seen?
What a joy to listen to! I have long resisted institutions and remained a club of one but this is group I would willingly be a part of. Sarah communicates so easily some of these really complex ideas and makes it all - well, so normal!
I really liked the concert analogy she used to explain Moloch theory. Couldn't help diving down that avenue and thinking about life being the concert and the wealthy occupying all the front seats and when they stand up the rest of us don't get to see life much so they need to sit down first to allow the rest of us to do the same. But they're not going to do that and we realise that maybe the concert we're at isn't really life - just what the advertisers told us was life. So, time to make our own music and create a life that isn't mediated by business and the politics of power. Together!
Maybe a concert where there is not tiered seating or standing and we're all just on the floor dancing!
I write about it in my Substack book but also in this post if you want to read more: https://sarahwilson.substack.com/p/its-moloch-dear-self-flagellating
Thanks Sarah - I have a little mind-liberating to do.... I'm half way through your e-book which is helping me feel less lonely by the page. I'm also a big fan of Iain McGilchrist and re-reading the Matter With Things - with notes!
Can't wait to listen, two of my favourite Substackers!
xxx
Similarly looking forwards to finding a moment to listen to this. Also a big Sarah Wilson fan
As expected, a very nice foray through collapse thinking with two of my favourite substackers. Good to get name checks and discussion of Tainter, Molloch, game theory, hopium etc. I'd have liked a bit more on the complexity and systems theory material, rather than the tech-bros, but it's all relevant, and the anxieties and fantasies of the tech-bros that are driving the world certainly warrant repeatedly airing. I tend to advocate "hate the game, not the player" (although it’s legitimate to hate both) as the crimes of Musk, Thiel and their ilk is simply to have been selected for or captured by the values of the systems or “game” that we inhabit (and "winning" at those values).
On the game-front, I find myself resisting the D&D point made by Sarah. While Musk certainly uses RPG & D&D teminology in very problematic, invidious and revealing ways, describing his opponents as NPCs. He seems to represent only a sub-set of gamers, notably the “powergamers” (who like to simply amass power, level-up and treat everything as obstacle to be overcome). In contrast, much of RPG & D&D culture is better represented as collaborative story-telling, which has a quite different ethos and set of values.
What seems to be missing from Musk and other tech-bros and oligarchs is the Mitchell & Webb possibility or epiphany, when they might ask the question “are we the baddies?” Or rather, in D&D/RPG terms, am I actually the “boss monster” or “big bad” that is destroying or enslaving the world. Sadly that moment of clarity or capacity to de-centre oneself, and see things from another PoV, seems to be lacking. I guess everyone only tends to see themselves as the hero in their own RPG.
Yes I think there are probably better "gaming" terms I could use. I show some ignorance here.
Well there are good and bad uses of gamification. It's a little tricky with Musk as he uses D&D-like language quite a lot, dismissing anyone in his way as a Non-Player Character. Plus, he considers it quite likely that the world is a simulation, which tends to provide him with a rather solipsistic rationale for thinking he is currently in a game which he is trying to win. Great work on the book, by the way.
I was unsure who was being targeted in the criticism about bros and "word salads". It's not just bros who engage in conversations that introduce challenging concepts about the meta-crisis, this podcast being one example. Isn't that what helps us all form some sort of understanding? There was at least a 'word garnish' in this episode for example.
I've lost count of the number of times that I've listened to this and other channels, where what the interviewee is suggesting sounds like Transition Towns. @Rachel, did you ever try getting Rob Hopkins on Planet Critical?
I'd also recommend Tyson Yunkaporta.
Hey Tim, not sure I understand. Sarah’s criticism of the tech bros was related to the ideologies they’re building technology systems with which affect us all.
Fair call re word garnish!
I had Tyson my podcast a while back. An awesome voice in complexity stuff.
Thanks Sarah. I’ll seek out your episode with Tyson.
Here’s an idea “that’s been laying around” since well before 1950 when Einstein described it as “…the only way out”.
World United will soon launch a global, nonviolent grassroots movement to establish a properly democratic World Federation of, by, and for the people—with the power to enact and enforce laws to end war, halt climate change, and control AI.
Not a League of Nations, not a United Nations, but rather a United Peoples.
It’s a big, bold undertaking–the most difficult thing we will ever accomplish, and it is both absolutely necessary and not nearly as impossible as it sounds. It’s the answer to the question, “What can I do?”
You can unite with your fellow humans to take back the planet. Please let me know what you think!
Roger
World United
worldunited.net
Medium: https://medium.com/@roger_16796
As you say, this is an old idea, one that I think has merit.
My 2cents...
I think that it could take off if hundreds of influential and respected thinkers from all corners of the world came on board, got involved and spoke out in support.
Have you looked at bioregionalism, r3-0.org, Earth Regnerators, Dana Meadows, Joe Brewer, Daniel Christian Wahl, etc. Lots of amazingly elegant process.
you might be interested in Tyson Yunkaporta (Sand Talk) who looks at selfishness in what he labels narcissism and the need for thousands of years of human civilization to maintain the checks and balance - checks that can be wiped out in one generation of colonialism. As he put it , "The Sumerians invented it (moloch/ Hamurabi) the Romans perfected it, the anglosphere inherited and the rest of us are mired in it".
Beyond excellent! I love it when my expectations — biases, are utterly crushed. So many new people to research. Thank you Rachel and Sarah.
I enjoyed this, thank you both! When Sarah bought up 'the prisoners dilemma' I was hoping you might discuss the work of Elinor Ostrom, the first female economist to win the 'Nobel prize', and whose life's work on the Commons was a refutation of this theory and Hardins 'tragedy of the commons'. Elinor was using game theory before those tech bros were even born early (and looked after by a whole ecosystem of care!) The book, Elinor Ostroms Rules for Radicals, is a super introduction - he can be someone to talk to about her work.
Derek Wall, the author
By the early 2030's we will reach catastrophic tipping points which will mean mass migration and extinction events. See the Jerry Kroth Video on Youtube. XR wants to organise a collaboration when they themselves are hardly an organised organisation but do have a conference coming up. What we should be doing is helping ourselves and communities to prepare for survival and resilience. One of the big mistakes activist make and continue to make is avoid the matter of what type of progressive socio-economic system do we want. Its way worse scenario than being described here by the main talker. https://www.joboneforhumanity.org/an_informed_opinion_of_the_current_climate_emergency
She talks too fast and yet says nothing much other than chicken little stuff and endless tree hugging and gets all the science wrong or makes it fit the fatalist narrative such as catastrophic climate change that she wants to see happen.
We used to call this stuff old wives tales.. now its mainstream and its like a boil on the ass of our modern western society.
There is no understanding of real human nature as we are tribal and apply survival of the fittest when the chips are down.
It’s a dangerous narrative that is destroying the goals of our children who must not be exposed to this crap.
The suggested solutions are 180 degrees from where we are headed.. we tried hi powered multilateralism and it’s a fail ….so its back to nation centric solutions.
I guess it’s the new religion and far more dangerous than the others.
The good news is most people disregard this stuff and get on with life… And we will soon wake up and come to our senses and correct our bad policies such as NetZero and the woke nonsense.
WEIRD STUFF... NOT MUCH REALITY
How so, Nigel. Intrigued!
There was much to enjoy here, thank you. Unless I missed something, it seems the subject of collapse only came up near the end of the talk. When Sarah said she focuses her hope not on avoiding collapse, (if I got that right) but on preparing for a better or simpler life post collapse, I have to wonder what she thinks humanity will be able to salvage in that situation. As things are going, humanity has no hope of survival. This is not an issue of mere adaptation. Climate scientists do not like discussing this and will even deny that our extinction is at stake, but there can be no other conclusion in a world likely to reach 3C of warming before 2100, no matter how much they need to keep their jobs and avoid speaking in such clear terms. She said humanity won't change, or at least not until pushed, or forced. If that push only comes considerably further down the road, like close to or after 2050, I don't think our chances of surviving the collapse are realistic.
Sarah's platforming of Tyson is warranted - fabulous mind.
https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/tyson-yunkaporta-indigenous-knowledge-can-save-the-world/id1548626341?i=1000616901062
I don’t understand the use of Substack and other computer technology media to talk about collapse. One of the biggest institutional users of planet-killing fossil fuels, besides the US military, are the data centers located all across the globe. All Substack posts and podcast distributions are forms of burning immense quantities of CO2-emitting fossil fuels like natural gas, coal, oil.
How else do you communicate with 28,000 subscribers across 184 countries? Carrier pigeons?? Radio -? How would you do it, seriously?
The irony comes in as a huge sludge here - if what is being “communicated” is some concern about the Climatastrophe, surely the means of the communication adding untold molecules of CO2 to that emissions increase needs a disclaimer, or at least an acknowledgement like our common “Land Acknowledgment.” Sure, no one’s personal carbon emissions are the deciding factor in humanity’s ecological non-future, but have you ever seen data center in photos? Do you know that arch-idiot Marc Andreesen was an early investor in Substack? Does hypocrisy never need to be seen?
Tell the truth - should that be so hard? No one gets points in this world for “good intentions.” Be honest about hypocrisy.