Tag: government

Why we need disruption now more than ever

Ever since I discovered the importance of individual rights and the role of markets in human progress, my biggest fear about the fate of world has been not that things will get worse, but that we will muddle along with more of the same.

My study of history led me to the conclusion that the rapid growth in the power of the State following the First World War reached some threshold in the late 1960s, and damned up (however imperfectly) human moral, social, artistic and technological progress in many ways.   I don’t mean some sort of utopia, but the next semi-metaphorical stage of human evolution.  A true cosmopolitanism to replace multi-cultural tribalism, post-post-modernism, post-democratic forms of government (distributed citizenship?), ubiquitous encryption, smart contracts, prediction markets, distributed education, designer babies, single stage to orbit, organ printing, uploaded brains, etc.  Ironically, it was capitalism that created the technological progress and additional capital to make the modern welfare-warfare state possible, before Statism throttled it.

The perpetuation of the mixed economy, a condition somewhere between freedom and slavery threatens the progress of civilization on a fundamental level. The social-democratic welfare-warfare governments of the world strangle innovation, corrupt cultural and moral progress, and hinder the flow of history itself. Ultimately, the fault is not with politicians but with ourselves, down the small-town American voter who uses political violence to zone his competitor out of business, or big-city busybody who votes to decide what how neighbor is allowed to eat, drink, smoke, or play.

I know that no human institution is eternal, and for better or worse, this era of history will someday come to an end, but the possibility that it will last through my lifetime fills some deep part of me with an existential dread.

How will the next phrase of history arrive? Will it be a peaceful and harmonious transition to a glorious future, a descent into totalitarianism followed by tragedy, conflict and collapse, or something I cannot imagine? Whatever it is, I want to live to see it — and I will do my damnedest to bring our long-delayed future forward.

I believe that history has a momentum and a direction of its own. Capital accumulates, knowledge and wisdom is perfected, and though it is weak, imperfect and inconsistent, I believe that there is a *moral* arrow to history – a steady progress towards a better, more rational, just, kind, and *human* future.

For decades now, democratic nations have existed in an increasingly precarious state, as increasing productivity of labor enables ever more looting of the productive class, but just below a level that would lead to social collapse.

I believe that technological progress will become ever more rapid and unpredictable, disputing the rigid schemes of the central planners. Economic cycles will accelerate, central banks will fail, and empires will rise — and fall. Or so I hope.

For better or worse, we need disruption to bring our long-delayed future forward. This is the thread that informs my criticism of our most respected institutions, and my support of the most subversive, disruptive trends.

Did Christianity's underdog origins allow the success of Western Civilization?

It’s interesting to note that with the exception of Christianity and some schools of Buddhism, every other major world religion were created as a means for the ruling regime to justify its grip on power as an expression of divine will. The divine hierarchy of the Old Testament’s angelic pantheon reflects and perpetuates the rigid social hierarchy of the ruling elite of its society. The god of the Old Testament demands taxes (sacrifices) accepts no competition (he murders over two million unbelievers) or critical questioning of the law, and presents a facade of voluntary submission (convert or face annihilation).

The New Testament on the other hand, was written before Christianity transformed to an institution of theocratic dictatorship. It presents a personal rather than collective choice (submit or you will burn in hell, as opposed to your tribe/descendants.) This subtle distinction may be responsible for the success of Western civilization, as secular rulers did not feel personally threatened when reason eroded the power of the church. (Of course, that did not stop the church itself from butchering secularists for as long as it could.) This is still not possible in the Islamic and Confucian world, where the secular and divine authority is united in a single institution. The attempt to introduce Aristotelian philosophy by Ibn-Rushd in particular, was wildly successful in the West, but because rational questioning was a threat to current regime, it was snuffed out by the institutionalization of doctrines such as the taqleed.

In Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam, Mahayana Buddhism has allowed a similar erosion of divine authority, creating the “Asian Tigers.” In this light, Communism can be seen as an attempt to preserve the union of divine and secular authority.