Seeding Utopia. Like, Today.
Hey, Torontonians:
The official “Seeding Utopia, Fighting Dystopia” series poster, by Annette Nedilenka.
There’s this local thing I’m a part of: “The Multiversity Collective” (which might not strike some of you as the coolest name on the block, until you learn that we narrowly avoided being called “Multiversity Our Strength”). Remember that “Toronto 2033” book that came out from Spacing a while back? That was the the Collective’s public debut, under the leadership of local Renaissance Dude Jim Munroe.
Well, we’re at it again: the Collective’s sophomore effort is “Seeding Utopias and Resisting Dystopias“, a series of workshops, demos, and lectures starting this—
Oh crap.
I thought it was starting on the 26th. I’ve just visited the website and discovered it’s starting tonight at 6pm, i.e., about two hours from the time I’m typing this (and significantly less counting from the time this post goes live). And in fact, Jim has managed to wangle some names much bigger than any of us actual Collective members: Cory Doctorow, for one, who is kicking things off mere minutes from now at the Oakwood Village Library and Arts Centre.
Sorry about that.
All is not lost, however. If I’ve given you unforgivably short notice about Cory, here’s a heads-up weeks in advance for the appearance of one Charlie Jane Anders, appearing at the same location on October 17. In fact, the series includes a solid dozen events stretching all the way into December and ending with my buddy Karl Schroeder on the 5th.
Head over to the Multiversity Collective Home Page for all the gory details. Here’s the executive summary:
- Sep 23 2019: Seeding Utopias & Resisting Dystopias Launch with Cory Doctorow, Jim Munro, and Madeline Ashby (again, sorry).
- Sep 26. Create Your Own Sci-Fi Podcast Show with Maggie MacDonald [Workshop]
- Oct 3 2019 BIPOC Utopian Dreams with Zainab Amadahy [Workshop]
- Oct 10 2019 Science Fiction from Elsewhere with Paul Hong [Discussion]
- Oct 17 2019 Never Say You Can’t Survive with Charlie Jane Anders [Talk/Reading]
- Oct 24 2019 Time Capsule: A Writing Workshop with Elyse Friedman [Workshop]
- Oct 31 2019 Horrific Ways to Save the World with Peter Watts [Talk]
- Nov 7 2019 Apocalypse Prepping Workshop with Kristyn Dunnion [Workshop]
- Nov 14 2019 Whorestories: Sci-Fi Futures Edition [Performance]
- Nov 21 2019 Sky Lab Revolution with Hillary Predko and Lee Wilkins [Discussion]
- Nov 28 2019 Everyone Makes Choices: Creating Choice-Driven Games to Re-Imagine our Civic Future with Tanya Kan [Workshop]
- Dec 5 2019 Scaling to Fit: Making Art in the Anthropocene with Karl Schroeder [Talk]
All events start at 6p.m. All events are free of charge. All events take place at the OVLAC. (I would also like to point out that all events except tonight’s take place on a Thursday, so maybe my screwing up isn’t unforgivable after all.)
Jim’s slotted my appearance in for Hallowe’en, which is not entirely accidental. I suspect I might be the least Utopia-seeding-minded participant on the roster, so it only makes sense that I appear in the context of mass death and resurrected corpses. If you happen to be in the area, drop in.
Hell, drop in on all these events. You’re bound to find something that reaches you. As you can tell from the roster, it’s a pretty diverse collection of topics. What else would you expect with a name like ours?
Oh, and about a week later I’m going to be in Bulgaria again. Details to follow.
>Oh, and about a week later I’m going to be in Bulgaria again. Details to follow.
Great stuff! Are you going to be taking part in a Ratio panel again?
“in the context of mass death and resurrected corpses”? Nope. This year it is going to be the day of Brexit. Have you prepared a couple of snarky references to that?
Has everyone been following the impeachment of Trump? I almost feel optimism.
Hi, I’m a fan of Blindsight, it’s my first time commenting here. I’m not from US.
What do you think about Andrew Yang proposals? Like ubi, democracy dollars, human centered capitalism, time banking? The dude even has ai and other emergent techs regulation( not bans but you know, not getting everyone killed by a badly designed utility function regulations I think), investments into fusion and considerations about quantum computing and encryption right on his website policy page. Would really like to know your take on him, whether he is ushering the new age of prosperity for us and the world or maybe you think ubi would get us into distopia?( private or public either way) His ubi implementation is pretty good in my opinion considering advancements from tesla for driving, google for call center workers and amazon for retail, there would be a lot of jobs lost pretty soon and pretty fast, and I don’t think I have to explain that this time automation is not like other times, with automation of a mind and adaptability itself. A lot of people it seems think that it’s just like the last few times.
He is climbing steadily towards front runners, got 8% in one of the latest national polls even, although their methodologies and predictive power are pretty dubious.
One thing that I’ve observed is a visible uptick in concern-trolling comments on a few of the boards I follow. There’s nervousness in the air, and even the faithful are stirring. This one doesn’t look like it’s going away that easily.
Of course, one should never underestimate the Democrats’ ability to screw up a sure thing.
Daniel,
May be the 2019 year still known as Year of the Brexit fo quite some time, but there’s already emerging trend that’d be prepared fully by 2020. Right. Teh Climaht Change, soon to be shortened to TCC – like in PMS, pardon my vulgarity. There are going to be more hostility, and trade wars, and probably even real cold/hot/civil wars going to happen – because we need to s-s-Save the Planet (from whoever it is not worthy of it)!
Somebody on certain blog just dropped another link:
https://thebulletin.org/2019/08/white-nationalisms-solution-to-climate-change-fewer-brown-people/
I don’t bother to read articles like this too much – the arguments are the same and the failure modes are the same exactly every time. They don’t seem understand still is that their failings come not from irregularities in the system (like those “nationalisms” and “immigration”), they come from the whole crisis condition of the economy and inability to introduce any perspective to it. The world-spanning system that is entirely built on liberal misdirection and corruption of rules on one hand and predatory capitalism on the other will inevitably lead to entire world becoming a huge pile of used trash. And the “climate” organizations of today and even the UN (like an old dinosaur corpse or something) are entirely part of this order and none of their activity will have any impact on the result.
I am sorry, it is hard to think about utopias in daring times like this, but perhaps it is better than other times because at least there are more opportunities opening when you are in such tight place. If this system might fail, the more opportunities for better systems of different kind – you just got to invent them, I guess?
It looks like I can’t leave a comment under meta2 post about text bots. But I wanted to let you know that openAI has released 774M parameters model – half of the one they keep to themselves.
I wonder when and how deep fakes will play out in these elections. We can fake voice, fake face and speech and even body now. We can fake news articles.. twitter posts etc.. I have no idea if all the effort they are putting into fakes detection would pay out and not be in vain. Can’t wait to see it unfold.
I don’t see deepfakes as a major threat unto themselves. They are easily debunked, and the only people who will buy into a deep fake video are those too far removed from rationality for facts and evidence to have any impact anyway. I.e. people who would believe crazy shit regardless of whether it’s supported by a deepfake video or not.
I would disagree with putting all the blame on “liberal misdirection” and capitalism. Authoritarian kleptocrats in charge of impoverished, industrially ravaged shitholes are just as much to blame. In any case, they’re definitely not offering alternative solutions, and their efforts to continue to exploit the masses who keep them in power are undermining the (admittedly feeble) commitments of others to stop climate change from reaching critical point.
The “crisis condition of the economy” you refer to is real, but not attributable to any single method or philosophy. Capitalism and all other systems have failed along the same line, which is the fetishization of industry as the universal cure-all, regardless of its catastrophic fallout. The outcome of these failures has been identical, with minor regional variations: poverty, hopelessness and an increasingly uninhabitable planet.
It’s easy and tempting to blame it all on predatory capitalism, because it’s the only system that survives today. But one shouldn’t overlook the contribution to the “huge pile of used trash” by failed regimes from the past. We miss out on a critical lesson by doing so.
Ah, of course you would disagree, because it is the best that modern system of liberal capitalism is capable of at this stage – to eradicate any alternative opinion and ignore any possibility of change in underlying principles. After all, “it’s the only system that survives today”, so let’s put all the blame for our failings on those unprotected “shitholes” and maybe shake them for some more resources they won’t need anyway. Hey, it worked last time we did it, we just need a new marketing strategy!
As much as “kleptocrats”, authoritarian or liberal, are to blame for current issues, they are the symptom of the problem (among many others) and not the problem itself, and coping with the symptoms is a classic case of misdirection and corruption in the system. So much so that nobody even cares to remove these people from their position of power as long as they are cooperating with “leaders of free world” and their rule, while those who can introduce responsibility and problem solving are kicked out the moment they step out of the line. If a certain person is given all conveniences, attention and speeches written, a green light to drive across half world to UN session, there’s no second guesses who is benefiting from it and what consequences it will bring.
Not at all. It’s just that a “possible change in underlying principles” would require an alternative being offered, preferably one that’s not a repeat of catastrophic failures from the past. We’re dealing with an unprecedented threat that requires an unprecedented solution. Muttering darkly and incoherently about “misdirection and corruption”, “benefits and consequences”, avoiding facts and using obscurantist terms probably isn’t that solution.
Kleptocrats and authoritarians are produced by angry losers. Whining like an angry loser doesn’t help anyone. Nor does the worship of murderous thieves for revanchist reasons or due to daddy issues.
The “only system that survives today” is dying, just like the more obvious and spectacular failures from the past. In the long run, we’re all losers, and everywhere is a shithole.
That’s most definitely not what I wrote above. Perhaps a quick course in reading comprehension would be of benefit to you.
Sounds great. Let me know when you find someone who can “introduce responsibility and problem solving” – I’d be more than interested to read what they have to say.
Speaking of catastrophic failures from the past, it is timely to remember what happened 25 years ago, as well as shortly after that.
https://www.timescolonist.com/life/before-greta-there-was-severn-the-b-c-girl-who-silenced-the-world-1.23959623
1992 – Kyoto Protocol;
1993 – Invasion of Iraq;
2001 (october) – two UNFCCC session in a row, one in July, and second one.. in October;
2003 – well, you know that one anyway;
2012 – Extension of Kyoto Protocol;
2010 and onwards – “Arab spring” and other consequences of it;
2019 – “Hey, how about we restart this whole thing all over again, hm?”
Another words, invasion of countries, destruction of governments, economies and lives – everything is the part of the same process of dealing with “unprecedented threat”. Only before it was marketed as “global terrorism” and “authoritarian regimes” and now it is going to be “climate change” and “authoritarian regimes”. A lot of meaningless verbiage for one simple idea – justification to act without respect to national borders, rules, morals or agreements.
Before “War on Terror” there was “War on Drugs”, and before that there was “War on Poverty”, And if this is going towards “War on Climate Change”, you should understand perfectly how well it will end up for the climate.
One thing’s certain – the responsibility can not be put into the hands of liberal globalists, or their corporations, since they can not hold it. They are not responsible before anyone but themselves, their NGO networks and their media personalities. They are the natural enemy for the rest 99% of humanity and their “authoritarian kleptocrats”, who at least can be indicted and brought to the court for their crimes.
I agree that similar actions have had little impact in the past. It’s not an excuse to keep trying. Public opinion is shifting – these days even some stupid people who don’t accept facts and science will grudgingly allow that climate change is “real” (tho they may argue it’s too late to do anything).
There are signs that politicians, at least those in countries where elections and public opinion still count for something, are getting increasingly nervous. Even if it isn’t, we no longer have the option of doing nothing
Come, now. Authoritarian kleptocrats are just as guilty of not respecting all of the above when it suits their short-term goals as “free market ” kleptocrats are. Land grabs, invasions of sovereign countries, supporting proxy wars at the expense of millions of civilian lives.
Pathetically failed wannabe global hegemons are not morally superior to actual global hegemons.
That makes no sense. Might as well throw in War of the Roses and War of the Worlds while you’re at it.
Translation: you have no examples to support the nonsense you spouted earlier, so we circle back to the dark mutterings stage.
Color me unconvinced.
You just got me Portia’d
No, this is completely opposite to what I’ve said and I wonder if you are even conscious when you are reading what I am saying. These actions have exactly intended impact and therefore globalist lobby has all intention to continue to do it in the future. Destroying nations, people and their values, history and education until there’s nothing left on the planet but them and their rule. They intend to keep trying until they succeed (or die trying, since planetary resources are finite), since those who don’t learn from the past are bound to repeat it.
That would be a credible concept if only there was no such thing as “government”, “law” or “borders” that are established and respected by most of the people. There’s now an organization that is responsible for dealing with such conflicts – the UN – and it regulates international relationships to prevent escalation. But I would admit that explaining these things to liberal globalists means giving them too much credit, since concepts like “history”, “learning” and “reality” in general are alien and confusing to liberal mind.
Frankly, I was also referring to a popular saying “If you think the problems we create are bad…”
But I guess, It is hard to expect such hint sensitivity from people with mental capacity and attention span of a smart speaker.
Истинец,
Same crowd. Different event.
The problem is, Trump is not the problem; he’s the symptom. You don’t cure smallpox by scraping off one scab.
Hi, Alexei. Sorry, I don’t know anything about Yang past his also-ran status across the border. Sounds interesting based on your comment, though.
Dude, I don’t know what timeline you sidestepped in from, but over here the powers behind the various wars you mentioned have all been pretty clearly opposed to taking action on ACC. Every now and then a politician will mouth the right words— and a number of them abase themselves before Greta Thunberg because they know she’s got command of an army seven million strong and they ignore that at their peril— but when you look at actual actions, there isn’t much to speak of. 2018 emissions were higher than they’ve ever been; we’re not even bending the curve in the right direction.
The last thing the people behind the War on Terror want is a real War on Climate Change. That would break their whole business model.
They are also known to be very hypocritical – always ready to criticise someone for their environmental policies, but also always covering their own failures at it. Individual politicians may not stand to criticize “Greta” collective directly because of powerful alliance of corporations behind it, but it never prevented them form going the smart way, relying on acting behind everybody’s backs while nobody is looking. In any case, the best you can expect from them is collective “oops!” as they change places in this fxxing musical chairs game. Something like this happens pretty consistently.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-49750180
Any responsible government would know full well that “new green” policies would be a death sentence for them and their economies regardless of effect of environment – if implemented fully, but it will not prevent them from using it as argument in international “relationships” (like blanket sanction) or in internal quarrels.
That might not be immediately obvious for those who watch only official media sources, but the business model is already broken to the point that only a wishful thinking keeps it afloat (and it has surprisingly big margin of safety). US may have already “finished” War on Terror by 2011, but it never stopped them from breaching everybody’s sovereignty for any number of other reasons. Nothing will stop them from using “climate” arguments the same way.
I was also rather surprised to see recent arguments that China may actually lead in this area, but considering the effects on economy it may actually turn either way – from undermining their industrial leadership much to the delight of stagnating US economy – to backfire spectacularly if China actually has the resources and competence to stand up to the political challenge.
https://intpolicydigest.org/2019/09/13/china-is-positioned-to-lead-on-climate-change-as-the-u-s-retreats/
Again, references to dark conspiracy theories and vague alternative histories when you have no facts to support your argument. When all else fails, blame the “globalist lobby”.
The UN is not doing a terrific job at regulating international relations, but they’re performing about as well as can be expected. “Preventing escalation”, however, is a moot point when there is only one side even remotely capable of “escalating”.
Criminal aggression by petty thieving regimes, with no respect for sovereignty, law or borders, does not constitute “escalation”. Even their own beggared or near-beggared citizens are starting to see through these transparent attempts to drum up public support, and their once-bulletproof approval ratings are fading. Sooner or later, loud patriotism and military parades become insufficient distraction from the hand that filches your pockets, or the boot that presses down on your throat.
I got what you’re saying. Was merely pointing out that it’s a poor analogy.
I too would like to see China take charge in combating climate change, but while they certainly have the ability, I doubt that their leadership has the ambition or foresight to take up the challenge. Hopefully I’m wrong.
Somehow, when people are agreeing to follow climate protests worldwide, it appears to be a legitimate and much needed way of “combating”, endorsed by various liberal groups. But when I say something about EXACTLY THE SAME THING, it is “conspiracy” because my speech has negative connotations. Nothing new here, a standard hypocritical demagogy.
US and their influence centers aren’t doing a terrific job helping UN either. In fact, most of the time they are in completely different business – corrupting it for their own interests and ignoring it for their own benefit. It is the same behaviour as any other Catch 22 of liberal logic – “we are fighting Teh Govemint because it is ineffective, it is not the other way around, honestly”.
https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/440954/UN-committee-postponed-after-Iranian-diplomat-opposes-U-S-visa
https://thehill.com/policy/international/russia/462723-russia-us-denied-visas-to-un-delegation-members
But somewhat you are right, of course. US has it’s own ways to deal with problems and it would never engage into an “escalation” with a force that can put up a significant opposition, this is why they need to deploy influence groups to destroy that opposition from within. Which is, btw, also classified as military intervention and a criminal aggression.
https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/This-Is-What-US-Intervention-Looks-Like-in-the-21st-Century-20170718-0012.html
Whichever it is, it is certain that nobody in his right mind would subscribe to suicide by law. And it seems that most of China is indeed not doing that.
Well no, US oligarchs are no different from any other oligarchs, and our history of criminal aggression is well known and documented, with ongoing and disastrous consequences. As is our support for abjectly evil, murderous regimes worldwide (some of which have even targeted us for those murders, but we still love them because geopolitics). We flaunt international laws (as well as our own) at will, and ignore UN decisions whenever they go against us. You’ll get no argument from me on that one.
What I have a problem with is the argument that there is some solution in allowing the aforementioned authoritarian kleptocrats to violate international laws with impunity. That this pathetic bandit behavior is in some way “standing up to the US”, or “standing up to the West”.
It isn’t – it in fact makes matters worse for everyone, even more so for the angry primitives in those countries who cheer this behavior on due to a deep-seated sense of humiliation and misguided national pride in a “golden past” that never existed. Revanchist delusions are no justification for avoiding to act on what could be the greatest threat to humanity in 70,000 years.
Except when it is the only solution to the situation when nobody is capable to stand up to other aggressors of that kind. Because it is the only way the law could possibly work – it is made by everyone to serve everyone equally, and not to serve only one side that proclaims itself to be a beacon of freedom and liberty and defenders of order (intragovernmental and independent entities are not exempt for this, too) like some kind of “world government”. Otherwise, the bullshit that gets generated by such excuses can bloat the whole idea of “international law” to the point it is no longer functioning at all.
The only problem with that view is that it seems, again, this “primitive” nationalistic world is the only one that really survives the coming crisis (and it is not the climate one). Alternative to it was possible in short period after Cold War, when economic collapse of USSR and satellites allowed a brief and explosive grow of US international trade and market expansion, but, as we (probably should) know, the world is round and now we live in the time where the grow meets its limits – again.
See, “Greta”‘s arguments about growth limits hits the point, but from the wrong side. Their solution, naturally, is entirely opposite to definition of sensible – corporation dictatorship, further growth of markets, only this time it is a market of “environmental” technologies and “eco-friendly” policies. At the cost of everything else, including but not limited to destruction of governments, cultures, nations, international law and security. Issues like arms control, drug trafficking, slavery and poverty will have to wait. Employment and education can go kick rocks, better prepare yourself for street protests! Look, a new Elon Musk tweet!
Btw a new chilling idea how to fix global warming very quickly – nuclear winter:
https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/10/misery-of-a-nuclear-war-between-india-and-pakistan-would-be-global/