by Naresh Jotwani for The Saker Blog
I have tried this simple “parlour game” a few times in India.
Pass a blank slip of paper to every person present in a group. Request each person to answer the following question anonymously on the slip provided.
An old, richly bejeweled lady is passing along a dimly-lit and lonely lane at night. A lone robber robbing all her jewellery would certainly not be recognized or caught. Out of a hundred adult citizens of the city, how many do you think will rob the old lady?
Clearly, the answer would have to be a number between 0 and 100. Note that we do not ask any person directly whether he or she would rob the old lady, although it is a fair guess that the person’s own bent of mind would influence his or her written answer.
From the two or three groups is India to whom I posed this question, the typical answer received was around 70 or 80, while a few wrote 100; nobody wrote 0 (zero). Clearly, the broad distribution of answers conveyed something about the perceived social norms. The answers received were somewhat disappointing, in that most people showed a rather low opinion of their fellow citizens. One assumes that in “heaven” the unanimous answer would be 0 (zero), while in “hell” it would be 100. My own answer would be around 30.
The basic question posed by the game is the following:
If a person knows for certain that he or she can rob someone with total impunity, does any other factor weigh in against the undoubtedly juicy fruit of robbery?
Let us now slightly change the setting. The original question was posed to residents of a medium-sized Indian city, highly diverse in terms of its various social groups. We now imagine the social milieu of a village, with a high degree of uniformity of simple lifestyle and values.
If I were to pose a similar question to village folk – which I have not yet done! – the answers returned would certainly be lower. Some may even scoff at the strange question posed.
Indeed, it needs no proof that a person’s sense of identity – and consequent identification with a larger social group – is a crucial determinant of his or her moral behaviour.
This simple, intimate and organic connection is today lost on vociferous eggheads who are set on artificially multiplying “identities” – while also trying to force a stilted, artificial moral code upon all “lesser beings”. It is a huge tragicomedy of the times that these eggheads identify themselves with the wealthiest and militarily the most powerful states in the world – while simultaneously deriding everybody else’s inherited, organic and native identity.
***
In that situation, would you rob the old lady? – “the devil” asks me with a sneer.
Most definitely not, Sir! How dare you even ask?
And why not? Pray tell.
Because I have my conscience … er … wisdom … er … good sense … er … something …
Although I fumble with my second answer, it is clear to me that the conscience … er … wisdom … er … good sense … er … something … was ingrained in me since childhood by family, school, neighbourhood … or something.
Let us posit that a “truly religious” person would not rob the lonely old lady, while a “truly materialistic” person would definitely rob her. Then it follows immediately that a “materialistic religion” would be a very strange amalgam, being in fact a contradiction of terms.
***
Now imagine yet another social milieu, one in which understanding of morality and ethics is not too well articulated. Note that we assume nothing about whether the setting is materially primitive or advanced; the old lady may be in a forest or in the midst of tall buildings.
It is fair to expect that, in such an ethically challenged setting, the potential robber will first check whether the lady belongs to “his own tribe”; indeed, for that very purpose, some parts of accoutrement are usually selected as “tribal signage”. A “very smart” robber may even endear himself to the lady to verify her tribe – and promptly mug her if her answer is “wrong”.
Clearly, even when conscious understanding of morality and ethics is absent, instinctive “tribal bonds” are present. Presumably, the “tribal bonds” lie deeper in the human psyche – although that does not imply that an individual cannot rise above the limits of tribal behaviour. The robber in our story may “see light” and decide not to rob anymore; or he may “turn dark” and decide to rob all old ladies, regardless of tribe.
It seems a safe surmise that – like me – the good readers of this essay would not rob the old lady in the dimly-lit lane. Indeed, they would not rob any person at any time, any place.
We should expect that, for any system of morality and ethics to be worth its name, it should be universal in scope. If it is wrong to rob another human being, then the wrong does not become right if the target human being happens to bear a different tribal identity.
Of course there are invariably disputes among people over property, contracts, money or something else; such disputes are common in any society. But any rational system of dispute resolution should not be biased by the tribal, religious or other affiliations of the disputants. Such affiliations should play no role in the secular technical details of the dispute.
***
A religion bestows a vision of humanity which transcends narrow tribal affiliations. Every world religion has been founded in a true spirit of universality. Unfortunately, with the passage of time, politically interpreted and manipulated identities cause divisions among people, which then lead to sectarian thinking, sectarian politics, sectarian conflict … et cetera.
The author knows of a remote tribe in central India which identifies itself using the native word pronounced as kokuru. It turns out that the meaning of this word in the tribal language is, quite simply, “human”. This fact can be interpreted in one of two ways:
1. Thousands of years ago, all the humans living in that part of the subcontinent shared this label kokuru; and thus the word had universal applicability at the time.
2. Thousands of years ago, other tribes also inhabited the area, and the kokuru used this word to set themselves apart from others; so the word did not have universal applicability.
Regardless of which of these interpretations is historically true about the kokuru, the word “human” today describes all of the roughly 7.6 billion members of the species known as Homo Sapiens. In spite of incredible diversity, there are no fundamental differences among human beings. Any vision of human life which misses this point is not a world religion.
***
Over the centuries, huge strides have been made in the variety of ways by which simple people can be cheated. We shall not use the word “rob” here, because sophisticated cheaters avoid direct physical actions in the process. Such refined tactics are called “clever business” or “white collar crime” – depending on whether or not they escape public scrutiny.
Regardless of the sophisticated techniques employed, however, the moral and ethical issues in “white collar crime” are identical to those raised by the story of the old lady. All other verbiage employed today – “free market”, “banking and finance”, “fiduciary responsibility”, “monetary theory” … et cetera … is largely window-dressing for “white collar crime”.
Of course big-time “white collar criminals” need assistance from muscle-men. Nobody has expressed this connection more clearly and honestly than Major General Smedley Butler did about a hundred years ago: “I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.”
Butler’s counterparts today probably lack the self-awareness, honesty and language needed to make such a statement; but no doubt a similar game-plan is in play today.
Note on recent events: President Trump has admitted rather candidly that the US is engaged in the business of providing protection to wealthy and/or captive clients. The strange coincidence does then strike the curious mind, that the Iranian general was killed while on a mission to de-escalate the long-standing crisis with KSA. Was the much-touted “imminent threat” to the US no more than the threat of peace breaking out between arch-rivals? A protection agency does not like to see a client suing for peace behind its back; that’s bad for business.
Naturally, as with all criminals, even among “white collar criminals” the pushes and pulls of identity are incessantly at work within the profession. It is glorious to cheat “those other people”, but a shame to cheat “one’s own”. Cronyism and nepotism amongst “white collar criminals” is not one whit different from that amongst a gang of robbers. Tribal behaviour is encouraged by cheerleading, rituals, honours, marriage alliances … and so on.
Many so-called economists use the phrase “animal spirits” to describe what drives “the modern economy”. The irony in having to invoke animals is apparently lost on them.
***
We switch our attention to normal, healthy community life.
A human being needs a stable identity to partake in family and community life, which is essential also to provide a secure environment for bringing up children. Today there must be hundreds of thousands of different group identities around the world, each trying in its own unique way to cope with the many difficult challenges of life.
An average individual’s life is intertwined with family and community; the world over, children are brought up in the social milieu thus created. Each distinct social milieu carries an identity tag – like the kokuru – which is needed for practical purposes. An individual’s need for a stable social milieu is not a matter of debate, fashion or pseudo-academic yackety-yak.
Indeed, it is also true that an average individual’s psychological balance is inseparable from his or her inclusion within an identity group. Pseudo-intellectual tinkering with an individual’s self-perceived identity is highly dangerous business. Such nonsense leads to severe social stresses and fractures, as attested amply in the west today.
A question arises as a natural consequence. Do even a very few people choose to attempt to rise beyond their inherited group or tribal identity? That is, to aspire to the universal?
It seems to be most natural for an intelligent and healthy youngster to wonder about his or her inherited or group identity. A rare such curious youngster would surely wonder, “In what way is that other youngster different from me? Don’t we two have a lot in common?”
So-called “community leaders” then have a problem on their hands. They fret: “If everybody started asking such questions, what would happen to our common identity?” So they distract, dissuade, bribe or coerce the youngster from asking any inconvenient questions.
Inevitably, however, in any healthy community, a few rare youngsters succeed in breaking free from their inherited or group identities. Their journey is hard, and many give up, but a few do succeed. For our sake, they should! The Indian word sant refers to such rare souls, while the worn-out stereotype is that of a youngster who leaves home in search of truth. Such individuals do the incredibly valuable work of removing mistrust among different communities.
Fortunately, over millennia, several genuinely universal visions of human life have arisen and spread around the world. The great men who made this possible are our true leaders. Since these visions are genuinely universal, no difficulty should arise from their multiplicity.
Unlike land or property, the space of universal understanding is open, unbounded and fully sharable. One person “seeing the truth” does not preclude another from seeing it, even if they speak slightly different languages. The vast open expanse of universal understanding is rather sparsely occupied at present. Trespassers and wanderers should receive a warm welcome.
Sadly, bloody conflicts over land, gold, oil and minerals will continue. Even if a cataclysm seems imminent today, one hopes that rational life will be possible thereafter.
[Closely related reading: Identity and Peace, Mapping the Global Divide]
Your summation is interesting.
I personally look into history. History is telling very much how people behaved.
So from my viewpoint I see no development on humans in this case of behavior.
And – usually – history tells us that religion had been always somehow a good basis for robbing and murder other humans belonging to other cultures.
And in this nothing has been changed at all.
The vehicle “religion” is still (and to a lesser degree some sort of more human believes or political “parties”) used nowadays. As any religion is a sure wagon where people are ready to sit.
And we are far far away to see that our earth is our home and should be regarded as such which means that earth populace should more be aware of it.
It is early here to be pondering your comments when all I really want to do is sip on my coffee. But I have heard similar comments that you make before. Religion is the cause of human conflict.
First, let me point out that you use two different words with two different meanings in your statement in the same sentence. “And – usually – history tells us that religion had been always somehow a good basis for robbing”.
Usually and always! Which is it? My thinking is that in using such broad brush strokes to blame religion for all evil on earth is akin to saying all doctors or anyone involved in health care are murderers because of many, likely thousands at least have serious reactions or die from their treatment or mistakes, etc. Some theologies do contain elements within them which can be a catalyst to hold negative views of a particular group. I will admit to seeing that. A typical one in the west would be a general view of Islam. It is a very negative view holding all Muslims in suspicion as potential head-choppers who want to impose their barbaric rule on everyone else. I used to hold this view. Therefore, in social media and alt-right media, there has been a lot of shrieking about evil Iran.
I don’t see that it is possible to escape ‘religion’ because it is in our psyche from ancient times. We just know there is someone beyond us, more powerful and hopefully benevolent than we are. And if such a view is not held, then a person can hold the view that he or she is god and worship themself.
Here is a warming thought to go along with your closing statement that we all share the same home. Since converting to the Orthodox Church, I have discovered a wonderful view of all others. It is to look for the image of God in everyone you meet, regardless of how different they may seem to you for the entire race was created in His image. And further, emphasizing that we should not be fault finders, always looking to and exposing the evils or perceived wrongs in others but rather looking at our own sins. We can see that we are not so different from anyone else and not better either. (Incidentally, I typed ‘converted to the Orthodox Church’ when I was going to say ‘became Orthodox’ which wouldn’t be so correct. Becoming Orthodox is a process. It takes time. Better I say ‘becoming’. I say this as a disclaimer because I am early into this journey and don’t want any errors I make to be blamed on all of Orthodoxy)
” Since converting to the Orthodox Church, I have discovered a wonderful view of all others. It is to look for the image of God in everyone you meet, regardless of how different they may seem to you for the entire race was created in His image. And further, emphasizing that we should not be fault finders, always looking to and exposing the evils or perceived wrongs in others but rather looking at our own sins. We can see that we are not so different from anyone else and not better either”
Amen, i recognize that journey as i am on that path too.
Thank you for writing that comment b4 your morning coffe was finished, you wrote a better answer then i could have written about “blaming religion” for all ills and evil happening on our earth.
It seems that people are attracted to religion because religions preach for their most felt, inner needs, such as justice, protection from evil, fear of death, etc.; but, above all, their need of community life, identity, and acceptance.
You will not see many changes in these basic human inner needs along the time. They continue being fundamental for us, human beings. Without them, we would be unable to recognize ourselves as humans…
Now, our material needs are another issue, and religions in general do not seem to be involved in people’s struggle to get some parity in the distribution of riches.
There are some obvious exceptions, such as the Latin American Liberation Theology of the Catholic Church from the 1960s to the 1980s, which was eventually infiltrated by the American Evangelicals and withered down; and, in Iran, the Islamic Revolution of 1979, which follows similar ideals of liberation from imperialism but has been challenged ever since by the imperialist world powers.
The potential of religions for uniting people cannot be denied; however, it seems that most religions are restricted to giving attention to people’s innermost needs instead of their physical needs. The struggle for freedom from imperialism continues everywhere, with or without religion.
An interesting point of view. I kind of looked at myself, what would I do. And my instant thought was, I just wouldn’t rob, period. Then I thought again and considered the circumstances. What if I had children, things were really bad, I had no food for the family and our survival was at stake? That did change what I would consider my actions could be under those circumstances.
Just beg
Humanity is all on the same journey, we are all related and all derived from the same source. It seems part of our growth and development to a more spiritual affiliation is to recognize this. Morality we all intuitively understand, we are free to follow our lower animal instincts of desire or our higher spiritual ones. As the author would be aware we are in the age of Kali Yuga, the bottom of the cycle, everything now is as materialistic as it possibly can be, hardly a time for mass enlightenment, but we need to do the best we can, better times are ahead.
The better times are relative to where it is that one is derived from, here in the states many of the youth are afraid of their ability to sustain themselves not only from a financial stand point, but from a physical one as well.
Even today’s retired are having to try new situations to in order to stay afloat financially, they are bunking up with each other, they share the rent, but not the meals. Can you imagine living at home into your 40’s and then shortly afterwards forced to bunk up in retirement? Ones ability to escape the insanity vanishes instantly as one asks, “just how could I have done things any differently?”. The answer is, you couldn’t, you were screwed from day one compliments of your trusty gvt.
What part, over the years, has materialism played in trying to stay afloat? Here in the frozen tundra and across the west, family is just people passing through, contast that with immigrants comming here who try to keep family together. At the end of the day, regardless of where one lives and financial ability, family is the ‘safety net’. Not the government. I feel sorry for those who’s lives are dependant on gov’t hand outs, CPP, OAP (pithy gov’t pensions for years of hard work), alas, I too, one day soon, will be at it’s mercey.
As the ancient Latin proverb states: Homo homini lupus est.
Mod- “”A man is a wolf to another man,”
This seems like all total speculation unless the “game” is actually tried in the settings suggested.
Why even start with this “game” if there is no intent to follow through?
A real study might reveal more useful info and basis for speculation as to motives.
“We switch our attention to normal, healthy community life.”
I don’t think anyone should romanticize or universalize the idea of “normal, healthy community life.”
Where? What era? Which continent?
What does “healthy” mean?
In some communities that means slavery/genital mutilation/dominance of mother-in-law over daughter-in-law/dominance by a rabbi/etc.
People didn’t escape from traditional communities for no reason.
Katherine
Escaping and leaving are two different things, plenty of people leave their environment, very few comfortably escape.
How about using this as a decent working definition of “normal, healthy” community life:
“Community life such as that which allowed all the good readers and writers on this site to grow up to be what they are … “.
There is no claim that such community life is “perfect”, whatever that word may imply :)
The ” Old Lady” question ; and who would rob her might be analogous to Fractional Reserve Banking . ” Tribal Membership ” could be analogous to the “Temporal Tribe” that has no real belief in an ‘ After Life ” based on one’s conduct while on Earth. Christianity in its purest and most elemental form ; if practiced by members in the “Apostolic succession” Orthodox Church would result in the Old Lady walking without fear at any place and at any time of day. Some ” so called ” Religions….are not Religions at all. Murdering Unbelievers who do not Convert ; or being encouraged to engage in Usury to Non Members of one’s particular ” Tribe ” gives lie to the claim that this particular “Tribes ” practice any genuine Religion. Fractional Reserve Banking is a Fraud and a Scam evidenced by the fact that the Banker is Not really safekeeping the depositors monies. Clever arguments to the contrary don’t change this truth . Any so called Religion that does not have a Dogma of an Afterlife with ” Reward and Punishment” for one’s conduct on Earth is actually licensing bad behavior ; like handing out condoms in grammar school. Following Christ’s message is all that is required. Herod’s murder of those baby boys on the news that Christ was coming is all one needs to know about the group responsible for most of Humanity’s troubles.
Yes, it is those who wield power over others. The lawmakers (lawyers) and those who control the money system. They are currently working together to rob and devastate all societies where their control exists. Debt is their only product and they use it to become the owners of everything. Their intent seems to be to recreate a feudal system with only two classes-the haves and the have-nots.
Even reduced to utter poverty I’m not going to become a thief. God always provides what is good for us. We can learn so much from reading the life experiences of elders, priests, monks, ascetics of the Orthodox Church. How many times did St. John of Kronstadt, the wonderworker go home without his shoes because he gave them to someone who had more need? The apostles never had a concern for themselves. When a wealthy person became a convert to Christianity they often brought some of their wealth to the apostles who never accepted anything for themselves but said to distribute it to the poor. I’m not against having good quality things, but materialism should not hold us hostage.
I live off a dirt side road. God’s creation holds more than enough wonder to keep me happily entertained.
Beware of turning to evil, which you seem to prefer to affliction. Job 36:21
The Book of Job provides every answer to the human condition and the difficult relationship God has with the human race. This is why the bible teaches God needs to both test and purify the human character because in the end it is His own reputation that is at stake.
See, I have refined you, though not as silver;
I have tested you in the furnace of affliction.
For my own sake, for my own sake, I do this.
How can I let myself be defamed?
I will not yield my glory to another. Isaiah 48:10-11
But he knows the way that I take; when he has tested me, I will come forth as gold. Job 23:10
Now some religious people think that with Christ death this was taken care of and finished especially with the baptism of His Holy Spirit but there still is the ongoing testing of our faith and its perfection in our lives. The key therefore is submission!!!!!!! Submitting to God in everything no matter what we suffer in this life.
So again!!!!!!!!
Beware of turning to evil, which you seem to prefer to affliction. Job 36:21
I can offer an anecdote here which will surprise>
I went to a public school in London… the setting was 15 years after D-Day…
Teachers would try to gain empathy from the kids by saying “today i will not bother with lessons – i am going to do a quiz”….to which the kids always responded enthusiastically… anything to get away from the brain-ache of boring lessons…
The teacher gave each kid a blank sheet of paper: Then he said: “imagine you are walking alone on Dartmoor but then a fog comes down and you have lost your bearings….but there is a red phone box which you can still see in the distance… so you walk towards this phone box and naturally you intend to make a call for help…but then when you reach the phone box, you realise that you have no coins…you look around inside the phone box and you see there is a bag…so 1> would you open this bag out of curiosity? remember there is no one around to observe you…2 > if you opened the bag, you discover that it contains money…coins and notes…what would you do? take enough coins just to make the call…? 3> who would you call? the rescue services or the police? 4> would you pack the bag and decide to make your way down the mountain without help? 5> would you advise the police that you found the bag containing a lot of money?”
My answer was that i would open the bag, out of curiosity…i would find enough coins to make a call…i would phone the police and state that i was stranded and that i had also found an abandoned bag containing money….
The teacher collected all the sheets from 30 pupils…then he shouted at me: “Oh I recognise your handwriting… how b…..y typical…YOU are the only idiot who would go to the police….whats wrong with you? all your classmates are far more clever…they would all take the bag with the money and walk down the mountain to find the nearest road without informing anyone.”
From that moment on, i lost all respect for the teacher and only wanted to leave this school… 40 years later, a classmate said there was a reunion…i was welcome to join in…
I went along…and over lunch i mentioned this incident, how it made me contemptuous of the “stealing-is-virtuous” mindset that prevailed then….
Wow…at this reunion there were pupils that were there around the same time i was there…others were 10 years and others 20 years younger…ALL looked at me with anger and said that i was completely wrong to condemn a deeply ingrained British virtue of “getting something for nothing”….
Sure, I rationalised that the fathers of my classmates were young men who were called up for military service …stealing from homes was the norm as you passed through strange territories….it is what armies do….later on they learnt in civilian life that opportunism got them ahead faster….
But that this mindset was still so strong in the year 2000, surprised me…
It made me proud to be Swiss….
A few years ago, a TV programme was shown here which aimed to test whether people were more honest and socially minded today. There were several scenarios including dropping wallets with money and an address, as well as a camera crew ready to follow anyone who had picked up the wallet and interrogate those who had not returned the wallet…
The result was very encouraging. London has changed vastly for the better…honesty is now the norm…i could also digress and say that there is no graffitti around anymore…no-one drops litter…people are spontaneously helpful if they see someone needs support…neighbours do not steal from others as spontaneously as they used to do….life in London is far more pleasant now…
Very interesting little test at your school.
Of course your choice was the only right one.
Anyone who has ever lost a wallet/bag/whatever and had it returned will easily fight the temptation to keep the bag that he/she has found by remembering the feeling of realizing that someone has found and returned one’s lost item. The reward of imagining the incredible relief and gratitude felt by the person who has his/her bag returned will far outweigh the ambivalent feelings and even shame, plus making excuses for oneself, etc. etc. to be had from keeping—that is, stealing—such an item.
Just yesterday a friend recounted to me that on his way to the hospital, because he was using a cane he got himself mixed up when he had to quickly exit the streetcar at his stop. Quite quickly he realized he had left his bag with his computer and other stuff under the seat. This was in Boston. He called up the station office of that line and was overjoyed to hear that someone had turned in his bag intact to the lost-and-found office at the next station.
When I was in Vienna a couple of decades ago I left a telephone book with ALL my contact numbers and addresses,including for all my contacts in Eastern Europe, Germany, etc. in a phone booth. The horror and self-castigation I felt when I realized I had left this book lying in the phone booth was extreme. However, about a month later someone mailed it to the admin office of the uni in Cz where I was teaching. Again, extreme relief and gratitude that the finder (must have entered the phone booth very shortly after I had left it) had taken the initiative to notice my address in the book and and take it to a PO and send it to the uni.
It’s really odd that this finding-a-lost-item topic has come up. Earlier today I was thinking that the great joy of finding or being found must be preceded by the horror/anxiety/fear caused by losing or being lost.
Katherine
“Sadly, bloody conflicts over land, gold, oil and minerals will continue” and even more sadly this has come to include paper. That and the power and control it brings with it.
Te moral isn’t religious, the moral is human. The basic material needs are not religious, they are the vital to live a basic life. The human history from the beginning of the world has teached us that for survive we have to killing, robing, attacking rival groups by force or by cunning.
The religion only qualifies or gives a different vision to the act of stealing. In general, the religious defend those who steal from the governments, but they go against the poor who have no other way of surviving.
It would be way sneakier to talk to the old lady, tell her that she needs in the afterlife some help. Instill some fear in her and shortly before the old lady dies, tell her that for handing over all her jewellery to some expert. That expert invented that he can help.
It gets worse, this expert claims to set the standards for morale.
I do not know of any proof that the claims of that expert are valid.
There is some hearsay that gets way over-interpreted to support those claims.
If I remember correctly there is a story stating that somebody is now in a different reality eating with somebody very important in that reality.
I am not aware that any fees or gifts fom people that were alive are mentioned in that story.
It looks like this group cooperates with another racketeering group who has the monopoly to create money out of thin air and lends it at interest.
Compare this to simple stealing.
”Sadly, bloody conflicts over land, gold, oil and minerals will continue. Even if a cataclysm seems imminent today, one hopes that rational life will be possible thereafter.”
The above passage inevitably leads us to another tantalizing riddle, like the one about the perceived likelihood of the bejewelled, old lady ending up robbed.
Nussiminen’s riddle: If a global plebiscite were held with, say, all people at least 18 years of age being eligible voters and where the question addressed reads: ”Which country, including its population, would be most welcome to get rid of?”, then what would be the percentage in ”favour” of the Exceptionals and Indispensables, (either Pindo or Israeli) ?
Such a pleasant read, this was.
Thankyou, Naresh
A great essay right along the lines and with detailed logical analysis of Tolstoy’s “The Kingdom of God Is Within You”!
Can we get there from where we are? Or, will the whole system need to collapse first and put us back to being hunter-gatherers?
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/freedom-learn/201105/how-hunter-gatherers-maintained-their-egalitarian-ways
Must we/can we voluntarily scale-down the size of our power structures to the level where morality based on common humanity is actually applied or will we keep building/trying to maintain more and more dehumanizing mega-scale structures until they simply disintegrate?
Are we going to make more efforts at social engineering tech which may soon also go genetic? Will such efforts as those ultimately turn us all into Borg?
Thoughts on that:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/unabomber/manifesto.text.htm
Personally, I think we are going to need a total modern economic collapse to restore our humanity and keep ourselves from destroying the earth’s ecosystems, or coming up with a brilliant thing like “ice nine” (See Vonnegut’s “Cat’s Cradle”). At the rate things are going we might just get there in another generation…to economic collapse, that is, unless we blow ourselves up first.