Post No7

On Acceleration:

Am I an accelerationist? Most likely. I gotta be honest though, I haven’t really looked into the term very carefully. However, I think the term is pretty self-explanatory, so I will use it here the way I’ve heard it used lately. I believe that we should not be slowing down technological progress at almost any cost. The technological progress I’m talking about includes, progress in Energy, Medicine, Transportation, and Space Travel. Meanwhile, the costs that I’m thinking of include, Climate Change, Wealth Inequality, AI Induced Extinction, and to some extent Pollution.

Now, I realize this sounds like the boring old debate that a lot of the world has been having for the last several decades, particularly in the western world. And while this may be mostly true, I think that there is more to the argument I am building up to. Unsurprisingly, I think that we are in a unique point in history, an inflection point, that could decide the fate of lives all over the world. And, as an accelerationist, I believe that the best course of action is for us to not only embrace technological progress but to expedite it.

Before I talk about what “expediting technological progress” could look like, I would like to discuss why I think there aren’t other alternatives to this path. As I mentioned above, this debate has been happening mostly in the western world, and one of the obvious reasons for this is that other areas of the world have been focusing on more pressing issues. Now, I don’t think I have to expand more on that point, but what I will say is that to some extent it seems that politics has gotten in the way of basic technological progress in many parts of the world.

Things have changed in the East, though. For the last several decades, China has been leading the way in economic progress, with Korea, and now India following not far behind in their own right. And so, I feel forced to make the hesitant argument that if we don’t embrace technological progress in the west, the rest of the world will simply continue to move in that direction anyway. And ultimately, the nations of the world will seek the best way to house their people, to build better transportation systems, and to harness energy, regardless of who’s leading the way in technological innovation.

The downside is not only that we would be left behind, but also that the future could be shaped by unfriendly governments. Afterall, societies all over the world will primarily look after their own people. So, while the West could end up in endless political fights that slow down their overall technological progress, the rest of the world would be rolling over these political concerns, regardless of their merit, on their way to clasically ordinary economic growth.

The US, and other western nations, of course are working hard to grow their economies; but that is not enough. We need to create urgency in the further development of our most important industries. We need to have the same drive we had during WWII, in the face of existantial threat, while appreciating the fortune of living in relative peacetime.