• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Dangerous Ideas

Ascalon

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
1,318
I am fascinated by that most ephemeral and yet powerful of human creations - an idea.

“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident,” Arthur Schopenhauer.

I am particularly fascinated by those ideas that at first appear dangerous, but when explored are sensible and beneficial but require a major change of the status quo.

The abolition of slavery, universal suffrage, same sex marriage, and many more ideas at first seemed crazy or impossible, before going through the stages above and becoming reality.

It would appear that we are on the cusp of several other big, dangerous ideas becoming reality too: universal basic income, the abolition of poverty, the end of homelessness, financial trading taxes, universal corporate tax rates etc.

At one time or another, all of these ideas have been regarded as dangerous, subversive or impossible.

This can be a collective thread in which we can post and discuss those ideas we encounter which might fit these criteria - dangerous, seismic, but, just maybe, ultimately beneficial.

I'll start with universal basic income.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_basic_income
https://www.investopedia.com/news/history-of-universal-basic-income/
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/universal-basic-income-explained

This is an idea that flies in the face of most public finance approaches, and particularly angers certain shades of the political spectrum. However, every time it has been properly practised it has been of far greater success than any other approach to poverty.

The book Utopia for Realists by Rutger Bregman explores the many experiments, from Britain in the nineteenth century to Canada in the 1970s, and goes through why they were often ignored, obfuscated or downright misrepresented.

Why does the narrative persist, as repeated by many political leaders, that poor people are lazy and stupid and that if you gave them free money they would simply become dependent and spiral downward into moral depravity? Every single experiment in well applied UBI has shown this not to be the case.

What other ideas lurk at the fringes of society that are simply too wild to contemplate, too dangerous to discuss or too subversive to the status quo to ever entertain?
 
Why does the narrative persist, as repeated by many political leaders, that poor people are lazy and stupid and that if you gave them free money they would simply become dependent and spiral downward into moral depravity? Every single experiment in well applied UBI has shown this not to be the case.
This may well eventually become the case (although until we really try UBI, this can only be speculation).
UBI could be introduced and the first recipients may mostly understand and appreciate it, and not become dependent on it.
Several generations down the line, however, and more recipients of UBI may have become dependent drones, spending their days doing bugger all.
Already (even without UBI), we do have some families where people have never worked at all. They have gone on to have lots of children, few of whom have ever held a job themselves.
Also... nobody has ever addressed how we would ever pay for UBI in a sustainable way. It could only ever be possible if every single nation on Earth abandoned money and became a communist state (the 'Star Trek future').
 
This may well eventually become the case (although until we really try UBI, this can only be speculation).
UBI could be introduced and the first recipients may mostly understand and appreciate it, and not become dependent on it.
Several generations down the line, however, and more recipients of UBI may have become dependent drones, spending their days doing bugger all.
Already (even without UBI), we do have some families where people have never worked at all. They have gone on to have lots of children, few of whom have ever held a job themselves.
Also... nobody has ever addressed how we would ever pay for UBI in a sustainable way. It could only ever be possible if every single nation on Earth abandoned money and became a communist state.
This the point of UBI - it costs less than the current provisions for the same issues. Current welfare and benefits schemes cost more than UBI when the knock on benefits of wider social care measures are taken into account, ie courts, healthcare, remedial education, etc.
 
This the point of UBI - it costs less than the current provisions for the same issues. Current welfare and benefits schemes cost more than UBI when the knock on benefits of wider social care measures are taken into account, ie courts, healthcare, remedial education, etc.
Would it still cost less if everybody in the country was a recipient?
At the moment, only a relatively small proportion of the population is made up of welfare benefit claimants (I'm excluding pensioners).
 
Would it still cost less if everybody in the country was a recipient?
At the moment, only a relatively small proportion of the population is made up of welfare benefit claimants (I'm excluding pensioners).

From what I understand of how the combination of current supports across the board, not just pure welfare measures, work, then yes. The idea is that a UBI is made available to all, though not forced on them. And yes, according to the way it is calculated, it costs less than the current measures, freeing up resources for other schemes of public good.

I highly recommend the Utopia for Realists book to get a good grounding on it, as the beneficial side effects, in terms of public healthcare, education, housing and policing are more fully explored.
 
An interesting, though very long piece here by journalist, author and activist George Monbiot, on how our attitude to land ownership is key to the kind of change that will be needed to tackle the fundamental issues we currently face, from climate change and homelessness to the growth economy and more.

From centerforneweconomics.org

"Private Sufficiency, Public Luxury: Land is the Key to the Transformation of Society"*








*TL/DR: Our C18th notion of land ownership will not bear us into the future dealing with climate change and growing populations, governed by economies predicated on relentless growth and resource exploitation.
 
This may well eventually become the case (although until we really try UBI, this can only be speculation).
UBI could be introduced and the first recipients may mostly understand and appreciate it, and not become dependent on it.
Several generations down the line, however, and more recipients of UBI may have become dependent drones, spending their days doing bugger all.
Already (even without UBI), we do have some families where people have never worked at all. They have gone on to have lots of children, few of whom have ever held a job themselves.
Also... nobody has ever addressed how we would ever pay for UBI in a sustainable way. It could only ever be possible if every single nation on Earth abandoned money and became a communist state (the 'Star Trek future').

We discussed this before with some others joining in:

From
https://forums.forteana.org/index.php?threads/the-credit-crunch.34862/page-30#post-1589002

To
https://forums.forteana.org/index.php?threads/the-credit-crunch.34862/page-30#post-1592669
 
A thought has been coalescing for a while.

Fake news, social media, gaslighting, outright lies, deceptions, and worse are so much a part of modern discourse that a terrible idea is taking shape.

What if democracy as we know it has run its course?

What if, not because it is inherently bad, but democracy can no longer be employed because it cannot be relied upon to resist manipulation?

What if we cannot use democracy anymore because we cannot trust the process?
 
A thought has been coalescing for a while.

Fake news, social media, gaslighting, outright lies, deceptions, and worse are so much a part of modern discourse that a terrible idea is taking shape.

What if democracy as we know it has run its course?

What if, not because it is inherently bad, but democracy can no longer be employed because it cannot be relied upon to resist manipulation?

What if we cannot use democracy anymore because we cannot trust the process?
Combine that with toxic tribalism, increasingly short attention spans, and "viral influencers" that run right up too national leaders and Idiocracy is the result
 
A thought has been coalescing for a while.

Fake news, social media, gaslighting, outright lies, deceptions, and worse are so much a part of modern discourse that a terrible idea is taking shape.

What if democracy as we know it has run its course?

What if, not because it is inherently bad, but democracy can no longer be employed because it cannot be relied upon to resist manipulation?

What if we cannot use democracy anymore because we cannot trust the process?
Apologies for quoting myself, but on my morning walk with doggo this morning, I listened to this podcast:
(Please note: other streaming platforms are available.)

It put me in mind of this creeping fear I have had for some time.

Following on from the general enshittification of public debate, the power hungry are using their echo chambers to radicalise their own bases, while wider media often ignore their more extreme pronouncements. This means that swing voters who are not within the echo chamber effects do not hear the madder statements and so don't often realise just how craven these people are.

I highly recommend people listen to this episode of a podcast that comes from a reputable author and commentator who is a former, albeit minor, UK diplomat, as he speaks to a moderate US political scientist.

It describes how democracies die in the 21st century in the context of what's happening currently in the US as it slides towards perhaps the most contentious election in its modern history.
 
Back
Top