The Venus Project and resource economics

I think it is a mistake to consider the growth of technology to be of main importance.

I guess they're thinking this would promote some sort of self-actualizing. I used to agree with this, but now I don't.

Let's look at it this way. Technology is an extension of our potential, our efficiency, that which brings us pleasure. Though we may classify our immediate sensations (as a result of technological extensions) to be that which brings us joy and happiness, I don't feel this works in the long run.

There are more extensions of our potential than just robotics and machinery that I hope the venus project would not wish to condone. What about the environment, the land, the trees, the forest? What about the great wonders? What about art? I've seen the 'circular' cities that they put in their orientation video. I pity this strategy, to put efficiency over art; harnessing some attempt at objective symmetry over subjective passion. Where is the continual passion in a circle, in that sort of symmetry? Where do you move on from there? This sort of society seems like an "end result" project, like attempting anarchy or something. I just don't like it. Only a rationalist would go for this 'make-up'. Maybe we won't need totalitarian leaders, we would be tyrants to ourselves.

Don't get me wrong though, I'm all for their focus on education. Their pedagogy wouldn't be such a joke (it appears), unlike american education. I fear though their attempt at being objective would only cause more bias in the education system.

Yeah, I agree with you Brightnoon, just wanted to throw in my two cents.

Ech... the Venus Project is just Leninism in outer space, with fancy CGI.
The idea that we would eliminate humans acting bad by fulfilling all our mediate needs is as old as Lenin, and has failed every reality test in history.

I always wonder why utopian change-ists think that cheap, abundant energy will lead to a better age of humanity. What did we spend the surplus energy of the oil peak on? A century of murdering including the world wars.
Wouldn't abundant energy just do away with the cost factor of high intensity military?

Military? Don't we need it for self-defense, I mean we just dont know what is out there do we Nero?
Thanks.

hi bright noon

yeh the venus project does seem hopelessly utopian to me. Though it should be recognised that to see it that way is itself a rather damning view of humanity..... like most utopias. Therein is the clue i think.

I agree with your comment re management. It resembles communism in this respect. Lovely idea until you hand it over the beaurocracy. Power corrupts.

Those who would defend the VP would say that through collective ownership and resources for all, then what would be the point of corruption? Well the age old potential evils in humanity remain obviously intact and the VP system looks ripe as a cherry and just as vulnerable. ie Sex and status.

Who gets the gorgeous girls? Its that simple. By what criterion would a female choose the best mate? How would a male remain satisfactory in a resource for all economically status free society? Rock stars and athletes presumably. The most appealing creatively and the most appealing physically........ both coupled with the new overiding status. Overiding the old financial success and raw power as status that is.

Now i ask, what is a status seeking short assed knuckle head to do in such an environment?

In fact it is with regard to status that we can see capitalist democracy in a revealing way. Namely, (and amongst other things) capitalist democracy is by far the most status proliferating social system there has ever been on this earth. Think about it. Status of mind boggling variety and degree exists everywhere in the west. Most of course are directly reducible to income and power, but nevertheless there is a Kaleidoscope of status forms in the west. Look how job titles have changed over the past twenty years (if you are old enough ) Everybody is a manager of something now. We may laugh at it ..... but it works.

Could the VP mimick that? Well not if there are no meaningful jobs. And even if fake 'job' titles were created, surely we would need them to be tied to something socially substantial for such status to be convincing?

No power over others? No money? ..... they may be the root of all evil but for many they are also the root of social identity.

Beautiful hot free sex without the need for beauty or any other status? Sounds too good to be true to me. I don't think men and women generally work that way.

Interesting commentary pagan.
"Who gets the gorgeous girl" is maybe the most important question in humanity. Maybe the only question. Everything else really only serves that purpose.
In hedonistic western culture we chose mates for short-sighted, hedonistic reasons. That's why the divorce rates are so high. Post-scarcity economy would only make that worse.
I mean, that's why western women convert to islam in such astounding numbers. It's a refuge from the slatternly image of post-feminist Western womanhood.
In the same way I don't predict positive consequences from post-scarcity. For example nuclear fusion. Abundant energy - and I tend to believe that all of the growth in societies complexity can be accredited to abundant energy - would only bring out the worst in us. What did we do with the surplus energy from oil? The most violent century in history, including the world wars. What makes us think we won't just have hydrogen powered planes to kill each others, instead of some utopian age of peace?

My view on this matter does not question Darwinism or competition itself, but as a Social Species with increasing need of cooperation for complex development asks, if we must not set the minimum Standard basis for this to happen...Hunger, Disease, and lack of Educational opportunities are not, most certainly, the best way to achieve this goal...just get a decent look on what brought up Terrorism...or the latest outrageous suicide rates, in France Telecom employees, were in Europe...

Best regards>FILIPE DE ALBUQUERQUE

BrightNoon,
I thought about post scarcity. It seems it would do away with individual freedom.
The reason oppression tends to not be permanent is not that people value freedom itself, but because of it's lack of material success. The reason Soviet Russia didn't work out was not that the people revolted against being oppressed or because enough stood up against the crimes of their leaders, it collapsed because of it's lack of economic success. You see the same all trough history; when the people are allowed to work for themselves material prosperity follows.
Post-scarcity would do away with that. We wouldn't have to care about material problems any more, but neither would oppression. It seems in a post scarcity world we could "afford" abolishing individual freedom for the sake of equal outcome.