by
system failure
In the famous movie “The Matrix”, machines are
presented as evil, enslaved people using them for energy. But when
agent Smith captures Morfeas, he says some interesting things to him:
“I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time
here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I
realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this
planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the
surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area
and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is
consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another
area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same
pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease,
a cancer of this planet. You're a plague and we are the cure.”
Of course, Mr. Smith's view could be characterised as simplified, or,
extremely cynical, but who could blame him when we look our
civilization today?
Mr. Smith's view is totally compatible with the modern
perception of economic growth. Countries struggle to stay alive in a
global arena of cruel competition, where the top priority is the
ongoing, unlimited growth. Economic growth at any cost, by any means,
is the only answer for progress and prosperity inside our current
system of values.
As the economic crisis hit many countries globally, the
"need" for growth became a matter of life and death. When
the bubble economy in the past years, especially during 90s, was
distributing fake prosperity only to take it back a few decades
later, the West had a chance to abandon an unstable version of
capitalism and turn to an economic model which could bring us closer
to the desirable balance with nature, more wise use of the natural
resources, with the help of technology.
One
step forward, two (or more) steps back
When the economic crisis hit the West, suddenly, every
goal towards the direction of balance has been almost abandoned. The
totally unstable and unequal model of financialised capitalism
"rewarded" those who brought the destruction with more
billions and threw entire countries to a cruel survival struggle. And
now, these countries are begging for investments and growth from the
same institutions that created this mess.
Prior to the crisis, there was a tension for investments
in clean energy. For example, European Union set some goals for 2020,
concerning the increasing penetration of renewable energy systems
inside the energy mixture of the EU, combined with specific targets
for the restriction of carbon emissions. Even Obama made some
statements, that forms of clean energy could bring growth and jobs as
a solution to the destruction by the crisis. All these things now
appear to be left behind because the goal is only one: Unlimited
growth at any cost.
Instead of using part of the liquidity to invest in
sectors of green energy and environmental projects, every state
directed all of the liquidity to the bankers who do not care, of
course, if the planet needs another, truly viable model. Add to all
these the geopolitical games with oil pipes and you have a pretty
good picture of the two (or more) steps backwards.
Meanwhile,
the population increases together with the energy consumption and
environmental pollution. Scientists warn about the implications in
the close future for the environment and the natural resources, but
only few appear to be truly concerned. Politicians surrendered to the
oligarchs only to keep alive a failed model in every aspect.
Our
"civilized" system of values
As a civilization, we abandoned classical values and
classical terms. The language has been relativized and the line
between good and bad, right and wrong, has almost vanished. It was
supposed that we should be more wiser from this process of abandoning
the interpretation of meanings in absolute terms, yet our
civilization turned out to be more primitive in the cultural level.
A whole system took advantage of these new conditions.
It has transformed planet earth into a global arena of ruthless
competition with profit as the only ultimate goal. Someone asks a
trader in the food stock market, how does he feel knowing that his
actions may lead thousands to hunger in another corner of the planet,
and all he gets as an answer is "that's my job, that's what I
do", like devil's advocate, Kevin Lomax. In fact, he doesn't
even understand the question!
Or, "What's the social benefit from a lot of
highly trained PhDs in physics using exceptionally expensive
technology across the world to be able to set derivatives prices in a
split second? Why set them in a split second? Set them in an hour.
Set them in a day. Never set them at all. What's the benefit?",
as Costas Lapavitsas masterfully wondered.
Economic cynicism is absolutely dominant in the core or
our system of values. Instead of trying to change this
one-dimensional thinking, we preserve it through our actions. The
whole system drives societies deeper into this vicious circle, as
more and more people are struggling to survive.
Poor
Ayn ...
In her famous novel “Atlas Shrugged”, Ayn Rand
describes a situation where an elite of industrialists, abruptly
disappearing, leaving their industries to failure. At that time, the
novel was not very successful, perhaps because Rand couldn't probably
imagine what would be the impact in case that all the workers,
farmers, schoolteachers and generally, ordinary working class people,
would disappear.
Rand was one of the key people who contributed to the
creation of this culture of economic cynicism and extreme
individualism. A fundamental aspect of this culture, is that
societies are guided to progress and prosperity by an elite of a few
charismatic individuals, motivated by personal interest, while the
state is the enemy of freedom and prosperity.
Well, here comes the surprise. We are now in a phase
where an economically powerful elite is automating all the production
process, trying also to control all the resources. Quite soon, big
businesses will be able to use exclusively robots instead of human
labour.
So, does Ayn Rand, surprisingly, turns that she was
right? Rather not, because two major problems arise: First, if all
the production is automatized and the workers lose their jobs, who
will consume the products? Second, what if super-intelligent machines
will become able to evolve without the help of any human presence?
"Cold
blood" robots vs cynical humans
We should start to wonder: is it worth to continue to
ruin our planet just to self-destruct one day? Wouldn't be better to
be replaced by something which would understand the value of
achieving an equilibrium with natural environment in order to
survive?
Many people already concerned about the possibility that
super-intelligent machines in future will turn against humans.
Scientists already warned about such a scenario. But honestly, if you
were an observer outside the system of the planet earth, who would be
more odious to you: a cynical human being destroying the planet just
to preserve a way of life without meaning, or, a “cold blood”
robot that would decide to destroy humans to save the planet and its
resources?
What is really the point of preserving such a
civilization? A stagnated situation of people who are struggling to
survive, consume, or, chasing profit? How we differ from parasites
who keep consuming because they don't understand that they live in a
planet with certain limits and resources?
What if Artificial Intelligence is meant to be the next
step of human evolution itself? What difference does it make when we
progressively abolishing human conquered concepts, like morality,
from our culture? If we want truly evolve, as humanity, we need to
bring back morality. We need to develop concepts like solidarity,
altruism, collectivity and put them in the core of our civilization.
Otherwise, it would make no difference - and probably would be better
- to be replaced by super-intelligent machines.
Read
also:
ICARUS HAS FOUND YOU
ReplyDeletewe will have a virus....long incubation period to ensure mass kill off.....70%of the worlds population will be dead....then the planet can rest....
ReplyDeleteNot all humans are bad....but good humans are getting harder to find.
ReplyDeleteHumanity will get what it deserves, if machines intervene of not.
We can preserve our way of life by programming the machines in tge ways of capitalism... Seriously, aside from the Matrix, what proof have you that robots wouldn't be worse on the environment? The have no use for breathable air, livable climates, food etc. Perhaps we've been terraforming for our robot overloards the whole time...
ReplyDeleteuummm .... robots are "MADE OF SOMETHING".... start with iron ore or what ever mineral... if your make a few billion... just think of THAT?.... JUST LIKE THE RENEWABLE REVOLUTION... it's all made of something... that has to be dug up, shipped and manufactured... we really should stop deluding ourselves.... mass production of ANYTHING.... IS DESTRUCTIVE.
DeleteWow, So, living a "high quality" of life, is worth killing the planet?... me thinks you are the "dumb animal"....sinking to your most base instincts of pleasure and comfort.
ReplyDelete