Future Jobs

Imagine for a moment that civilization survives its many current existential crises. Automation and artificial intelligence would surely fulfill their promise and do all the unpleasant and necessary jobs. In fact, the very idea of having a “job” would vanish .

Of course, that also requires that we imagine a world of plenty, where machines equitably provide endless bounty for everyone. But suppose that happens. What remains? Traditional moralists, naturally, claim that with no “jobs” people lose purpose and degenerate. Those very moralists often emerge from an elite strata of wealth that abhors the idea of “job”. Aristocrats find purpose in many things – social games, hobbies, whatever .

I imagine such a future would be filled with nothing but aristocrats, good and bad, who resemble the aristocrats of old without requiring servants or peasants to support their needs .

Others might claim there are two equally likely outcomes. One is a new society that resembles European explorers’ vision of South Sea Island Paradise, where everyone is happy and lazy and all needs are supplied by nature. The other is the garden of Eden, where all is peaceful and wonderful as long as you don’t anger the AI running the show .

Ah, but that’s all just imagination of the destination. Getting there – or wherever – is going to be a lot more interesting, and maybe unpleasant as well .

Deregulation

Laws and regulations are both necessary and infuriating. It all depends. We imagine they have been around in one form or another forever – sometimes as traditions or taboos, sometimes merely as the whims of the strongest ruler or group. It is impossible to imagine a society without them .

And that is really the key to the problem. Because with social tribes, we imagine things to be more fluid. “Let me do what I want or I’ll go somewhere else!” We believe that as civilization takes hold, every individual becomes encrusted with responsibilities and prohibitions until he or she cannot breathe. “What is not mandated is forbidden .”

We further imagine the frontier as freedom. Cities are confining. Run away to open space, where each can do as each desires. There may be some truth in that, but people are complex. For some reason, throughout history, folks often ran away from rural pastures and small farms to the great cities .

The advantage, of course, has been anonymity. In a city you feel free because the mobs (usually) don’t know you. In spite of those pesky regulations on everyone .

Regulations do tend to hinder innovation and progress. Keeping them “under control” or focused on “common sense” is difficult. Yet cities usually manage to work it out .

It’s when the rural yokels with little experience take charge and get rid of regulations that things really fall apart .

Enough Rope

“Giving someone enough rope to hang himself” seems to be the current position of the opposition party. Sober and sensible people can see that what “he” is doing is totally wrong, but he’s convinced himself and others that he can pull off a miracle .

In some cases, it’s true that active opposition is useless and often counterproductive. It’s the nature of braggarts to blame others when they fail, and who easier to blame than those who worked against the plan. A glib orator can even carry a lot of his charmed audience along with him .

So let him do what he will and then pick up the pieces after the inevitable destruction .

The problem, of course, is that sometimes the person with the wrong vision is totally drunk and going to drive you home in his car. Giving him enough rope to prove he’ll wreck the vehicle and kill others may end your life as well. Not to mention being morally wrong to let him drive under any circumstances .

We are already in the car. I understand that the “enough rope” approach is tempting. I truly hope it ends short of disaster .

Mercenary “Warriors”

It’s a truism that the military always prepares for the last war. A new element is that our current leaders want to prepare for war as depicted in movies and video games. Manly men who can savagely destroy all opposition with increasingly massive personal weaponry .

Of course we’re not quite sure what the “last war” was for the US, but we didn’t seem to win it. On the other hand, the Ukraine conflict seems to prove that any tween in her city bedroom can wipe out a squad of bazooka toting cowboys with a remote drone strike .

And if a “real war” starts, both the cowboys and tween are one nuclear blast – delivered hypersonically – away from oblivion .

But manly men want jobs and the military life seems to fit a certain psychology. The problem is that building an elite group of well-paid volunteers (aka mercenaries) who follow politics – which seems to be the current goal of the administration – will surely lead _ as it always does (witness the Praetorians, Mamalukes, Janissaries) _ to that cadre getting rid of leaders they don’t like (i.e who don’t pay them enough .)

Obviously, I am hardly a fan of manly men syndrome. But personal squeamishness aside, I just think the idea is ineffective, historically inaccurate, stupid, and based on adolescent male fantasies .

Idiot Savant

The classic “idiot savant” is an individual whose brain is wired differently. Brilliant at something – math is a frequent example – but unable to shop for food. We have expanded the idea into “spectrum” to account for the fabulous complexity of human consciousness, but the idea remains useful .

Thus I imagine a new breed of idiot savant, less based on basic brain wiring (although of course genetics may be strongly involved), and more on shallow but focused training. Such a person can become rich and even powerful, but treats other people as if they did not exist – or rather exist only as other objects like rocks or bacteria. Because of such focus, that idiot may have undue influence on society. Like any other amoral cripple, that person may have disastrous effects on everyone else.

Unfortunately we have been educated to admire financial success more than social success. Making more dollars seems much more important than making people happy. We easily offer excuses for the worst behavior of billionaires .

Worst of all, we have let them advance to become rulers, where they fail miserably.

Government is about people, not money. But the “idiot savants” never learn that fundamental truth .

Wrong Track

I appreciate democracy (if rights are guaranteed to the minority), and respect people’s opinions as much as I do my own. But I find polls on issues increasingly silly. A good example is one of the current favorites – “is this country on the right track or the wrong track?”.

In my experience, if asked how I feel about the world in general, on any given day my reply might vary considerably. Actually, it might change a good deal from hour to hour. And ” how do I feel” is at least a pretty firm question .

But ask me if I am on the “right track” or not and I would be pretty lost. The thing is, a track goes somewhere. So the first question implied is do I think there is a single destination like Chicago or am I just “heading west.” And am I sure that’s where or the way I want to go?

The second problem is momentary detours with good reason. I want to get to Chicago but this train is heading for Pittsburgh. Is that bad? If it’s heading south to avoid a mountain range, is my journey going wrong? And trains? Tracks? Who uses tracks anymore anyway. So restrictive.

But okay, all of that, bundle it up, maybe I can give an answer in personal terms. But a whole country,? Everyone? The vast future? This is a ridiculous and meaningless waste of time.

But folks like to believe in something. At least asking about non-existent tracks is relatively harmless

Sex, Drugs, and Golden Old

Wealthy scions who are taking over our country are well trained in the ways of technology, finance, and getting what they want. These paragons know nothing about the rest of society or history, and think all other people are just plug-in employees to be used like any other tool (when useful and inexpensive) and discarded when they wear out. Of course, their own daddy’s old days were perfection.

I think of them as the rich “frat boys” I always hated. They believe rules are made for lesser folks. The “brothers” can drink and carouse without limit. They talk the talk, walk the walk, and hire each other on the “merit” of being alike, and having the same background, and knowing the right people. Grudgingly, they may admit nouveau riche to their closed club room .

Currently, their goal is to enshrine a 19th century capitalistic corporate mentality into government. This requires a strong authoritarian CEO who is only removed by actions of the “board” _ meaning them. Citizens are either consumers (who can like it or lump it) or employees (who are simply another inert productive input.) If they could, they’d fire everyone when times get rough .

It’s sad. We’ve seen such fanaticism before in Europe in the guise of socialism, in China in the guise of communism, in South America in the guise of superman magic fables.

Ah, but the dream of capitalistic government must surely be different .

Triumphant Ignorance

Lately, everyone seems to love ignorance. “I didn’t know”, “I wasn’t aware”, “I haven’t seen” are all played as “get out of jail free cards” when anyone is caught in a lie. Ignorance is truly bliss .

Of course, ignorance is hardly ever used in the present. “I don’t know” is certain doom. One must be confident and strident even when making up lies out of whole cloth. No matter if later you are proved wrong, because you were either “misinformed” or “misunderstood.”

Once upon a time, as in all good fairy tales, there was a standard of truth, and a test of past truthfulness applied to congenital liars. Now we simply accept them as entertaining orators, making up tall tales to enliven our dull lives .

There is a pervading zeitgeist that ignorance doesn’t matter. We can always learn the truth later and correct any mistakes “inadvertently” made by not learning the truth ahead of time .

As bridge builders still know, that’s a dangerous philosophy in a lot of areas. Apparently, government is no longer one of them .

Vox Populi

“The voice of the people is the voice of God.” Perhaps. But the wealthy, the bureaucrats, and the lawyers actually run things. It is claimed that if “vox populi” selects the rulers, they will keep all the others in line with what people want .

The problem, of course, is that “the people” can be defined in many ways and aggregated differently. Majority does not equal unanimity. Two thousand voting yes against two thousand one voting no is a muffled mutter from god at best. But winners of an election like that will nevertheless declare a “mandate” to do what they want .

And rulers – elected or not – are clever folks, or they would not be rulers. They can easily manipulate the shouts of a mob for one thing or another to camouflage what they really want to do .

Finally, “the people” tend to be many “peoples” in different places and situations. Federalism just disguises the problem – there will still be minorities everywhere. Sure, constitutions can guarantee “rights” to keep vox populi in check, but that has historically been a very weak reed, especially if times get difficult .

All that is why I cringe every time a politician claims “the people have spoken.” I think democracy may be the “least bad” form of government, but we should never pretend that it is actually close to “god“.

Analog Tradition

Law is binary. You are either guilty or not. Lawyers make lots of money “proving” one thing or another. In general, you can push right up against the line (and even tiptoe a little over it) and still be completely “innocent” .

Tradition, on the other hand, is analog. It is also where we spend most of our lives. There is rarely, for example, a thin line dividing rude behavior from acceptable, but it is certainly possible to act more and more rudely .

When we interact with society, we expect rules based on law to be in place, but those are almost invisible most of the time. We are buffeted by tradition and its expectations – how far to stand apart, how loudly to express opinions, what to wear, general demeanor and behavior .

It is therefore far more jarring when traditions change dramatically then when most laws do. Old people especially can be blindsided and upset by all the terrible erosion of “normal” behavior as the young sweep away the “olden days”.

Everyone eventually settles into the “new normal” and adjusts their expectations accordingly. Traditional change – lacking enforcement apparatus – is often less jarring than law change.

The old people do occasionally try to get their revenge by passing laws to formalize those old traditions .