Dystopias are reactionary!

[Raphael]

I hope it's ok for me to go back to the colonize Mars point for a second. I for one think we should, or at least colonize Venus.

In fiction, I'd be a lot more impressed by a story about colonizing Venus than by a story about colonizing Mars! Much more original.

[WeepingElf]

The problem with such "solutions" as terraforming (either to repair a collapsed Earth, or to relocate to another planet), or, for that matter, nuclear fusion, is that we don't have the time. We have to act now, with technologies that are currently available, and that disqualifies all kinds of sci-fi goosh-wow that will take decades or even centuries to develop, or remain fantasy for ever.

[alice]

This indeed is one of my biggest problems with representative democracy -- once elected, the public has little to no control over their representatives aside from voting them out in the next election, which may be years down the line, and even if recalls are available as an option they are so difficult to greatly limit the leverage that they give the public upon their representatives.

The opposing view is that elected representatives shouldn't necessarily be beholden to the vagaries of current public opinion, so that they can get things done.

[Raphael]

This indeed is one of my biggest problems with representative democracy -- once elected, the public has little to no control over their representatives aside from voting them out in the next election, which may be years down the line, and even if recalls are available as an option they are so difficult to greatly limit the leverage that they give the public upon their representatives.

The opposing view is that elected representatives shouldn't necessarily be beholden to the vagaries of current public opinion, so that they can get things done.

Teh People are often smarter than they get credit for, but let's face it, if they would get their way on budget matters, then the public funds, or the community funds in a non-state society, would have a lot of expenditures and basically no sources of income.

[Travis B.]

This indeed is one of my biggest problems with representative democracy -- once elected, the public has little to no control over their representatives aside from voting them out in the next election, which may be years down the line, and even if recalls are available as an option they are so difficult to greatly limit the leverage that they give the public upon their representatives.

The opposing view is that elected representatives shouldn't necessarily be beholden to the vagaries of current public opinion, so that they can get things done.

The main case in which I would give that acting against the wishes of the public may be a good thing is when defending the rights of members of the public is concerned, which is why I believe that fundamental rights should be entrenched so a mere majority cannot undo them.

[alice]

This indeed is one of my biggest problems with representative democracy -- once elected, the public has little to no control over their representatives aside from voting them out in the next election, which may be years down the line, and even if recalls are available as an option they are so difficult to greatly limit the leverage that they give the public upon their representatives.

The opposing view is that elected representatives shouldn't necessarily be beholden to the vagaries of current public opinion, so that they can get things done.

Teh People are often smarter than they get credit for, but let's face it, if they would get their way on budget matters, then the public funds, or the community funds in a non-state society, would have a lot of expenditures and basically no sources of income.

Put another way, "everyone else should pay taxes except me, because reasons".

[bradrn]

I hope it's ok for me to go back to the colonize Mars point for a second. I for one think we should, or at least colonize Venus.

In fiction, I'd be a lot more impressed by a story about colonizing Venus than by a story about colonizing Mars! Much more original.

There’s plenty of them, actually; the first that came to mind was Cordwainer Smith’s When the People Fell, but there are others. (Admittedly most of the were written in the times when Venus’s true nature wasn’t known, including Smith’s.)

[Raphael]

There’s plenty of them, actually; the first that came to mind was Cordwainer Smith’s When the People Fell, but there are others. (Admittedly most of the were written in the times when Venus’s true nature wasn’t known, including Smith’s.)

Oh, thank you!

[rotting bones]

Can fiction change the world? Isn't its primary purpose to produce recognition?

[Raphael]

Can fiction change the world? Isn't its primary purpose to produce recognition?

You can probably easily argue that the works of Ayn Rand have done real harm to the world. And while I'm less sure about individual works of science-fiction, I'd argue that the very existence of science-fiction as a genre probably had an impact on the world, by influencing how people imagined "The Future" would look like.

[rotting bones]

You can probably easily argue that the works of Ayn Rand have done real harm to the world. And while I'm less sure about individual works of science-fiction, I'd argue that the very existence of science-fiction as a genre probably had an impact on the world, by influencing how people imagined "The Future" would look like.

The most sophisticated solarpunk novel is arguably Ministry for the Future, which is very dark. How do you make your alternative plans feel urgent to the story without introducing contrast?

[rotting bones]

You can probably easily argue that the works of Ayn Rand have done real harm to the world. And while I'm less sure about individual works of science-fiction, I'd argue that the very existence of science-fiction as a genre probably had an impact on the world, by influencing how people imagined "The Future" would look like.

If you are writing to change the future, will the results be as fun?

As for Ayn Rand, I don't understand why anyone reads her. Ayn Rand enjoyers look like a different species who have nothing in common with me. I can't generalize from their experiences.

[Raphael]

As for Ayn Rand, I don't understand why anyone reads her. Ayn Rand enjoyers look like a different species who have nothing in common with me. I can't generalize from their experiences.

She was big on talking about logic, but basically, her ideas seem to have been about about philosophical rationalizations for her personal emotional preferences. That means that people whose own personal emotional preferences are similar to hers might enjoy being told that their personal emotional preferences are philosophically and rationally superior to different preferences.

[rotting bones]

She was big on talking about logic, but basically, her ideas seem to have been about about philosophical rationalizations for her personal emotional preferences. That means that people whose own personal emotional preferences are similar to hers might enjoy being told that their personal emotional preferences are philosophically and rationally superior to different preferences.

Exactly. She's known to be a cult leader, and "rationalists" still love her.

Honestly, it's not just them. Basically all political analysts "taken seriously" these days base their arguments by citing CIA operatives, etc. This insane attitude is so normalized these days that it feels like our biggest enemy is our common sense notion of "seriousness" itself. It's so bad that I'm forced to ignore all the words these parrots repeat and read theory from the last century instead.

[rotting bones]

Another issue with utopianism is that societies that look attractive to some people look repulsive to others. Apparently, some people liked the "progressive" society in the movie Interstellar where engineering is apparently considered to be antisocial or something.

[Raphael]

Another issue with utopianism is that societies that look attractive to some people look repulsive to others.

That's a problem with political platforms that are not presented in the form of fiction, too, though.

[Travis B.]

She was big on talking about logic, but basically, her ideas seem to have been about about philosophical rationalizations for her personal emotional preferences. That means that people whose own personal emotional preferences are similar to hers might enjoy being told that their personal emotional preferences are philosophically and rationally superior to different preferences.

Exactly. She's known to be a cult leader, and "rationalists" still love her.

The big-L "Libertarian" types in general are insane. I still vividly remember arguing with these people who earnestly believed that public education is theft and is thus immoral of all things...

[rotting bones]

That's a problem with political platforms that are not presented in the form of fiction, too, though.

Does fiction have to be a political platform, though? I like it best when it starts by exploring the workings of the world, and philosophical ruminations emerge naturally from this exploration.

[rotting bones]

The big-L "Libertarian" types in general are insane. I still vividly remember arguing with these people who earnestly believed that public education is theft and is thus immoral of all things...

Yes. My issue is that Ayn Rand is so big. Large numbers of people cite her books as having moved them the most.

[Raphael]

rb: I don't think it has to be. But I don't mind when it is, as long as it's roughly in line with my own values.

I still vividly remember arguing with these people who earnestly believed that public education is theft and is thus immoral of all things...

There is a certain internal logic behind that - a bs one, IMO, but still, internally to some extent coherent. Just pathologically callous, and ridiculously unconcerned with how people's life and people's minds actually work.

BTW, Her Aynness seems to have had a very low opinion of capitalist libertarians, despite having many of the same ideas as them.