The left has never been as monolithic as you claim, and the New Left split in many ways. One of those splits was what would eventually become Communalism, and Murray Bookchin was explicitly against antitechnology.
5 Likes
They should have each invested their $1,000 in the NASDAQ at the time and agreed the winner takes all in 2020. It was quite a run over those 35 years. Figure that $1,000 would be roughly $10,000 by the end of 2020.
1 Like
Or the guy holding the asset should have taken the $2k, and bought s&p500 contracts. Then pocketed the ~25k for his troubles of dealing with such a stupid bet.
Yeah. But in reality they both wrote paper cheques that were held until the bet came due. So they had the use of their money the whole time. Maybe one or both of them made the investments but more likely not.
1 Like
At best, the glass is half empty.
This sounds an awful lot like generating cheap electricity from nuclear fusion. As long as I can remember, it has been about 10 years away from fruition. And 20 years is just long enough for us to imagine that if things keep going on the way they have been, it will become untenable.
I keep thinking about WWI (and then II) when it must have seemed like the world really was on the brink of disaster. And then the cold war - which led me to believe that it was a fact that I would die in a nuclear holocaust. Then the population crisis. The energy crisis. Y2K. This pandemic (and the inevitable next one).
The world has always been ending, and as my wife says “always bet on the least interesting outcome”. It always will be ending because that gets our attention and can spur us to action. I know I probably sound like a pollyanna - but my guess is that we will muddle through whatever comes next. We didn’t get to the top of the food chain by giving up in the face of adversity OR by overreacting to uncertain threats. We adapt, we abide, and for the most part, things generally work out.
1 Like
What bank honors 25 year old checks?
2 Likes
3 Likes
Ha - you made me read the actual source article on Wired. Despite the image at the top which shows cheques with new dates years written in the winner, Kelly, directed the loser, Sale, to make a $1,000 contribution to a charity. Notably, the loser welched.
4 Likes
Kelly won, with a best of three on the conditions set.
Point One: Economic Disaster that renders the dollar worthless.
Economy in turmoil? Yes, but it’s still functioning. You can go to the store, buy food, or other goods, (accepting health risks), or you can order online (Wouldn’t be an option under the Neo-Luddite btw). The dollar? Far from worthless, even the Zimbawean dollar has been revalued and holds worth, after it’s insane inflation. No one is even realistically considering that their US Dollar currency won’t be usable for acquiring necessities any time soon, or they’d be asking for something other than dollars for their economic stimulus money.
Point two: Rebellion by the poor against the Rich.
There is no rebellion by the poor. Demonstrations and protests, yes, but what have they been for? Calls to political action within the existing system. Demands that the existing laws be applied regardless of race, political affiliation, or yes, monetary holdings. Not dramatic change of the system itself. Is the political system in peril? Yes, but by the rich looking to extend power.
On point three, more environmental disasters
Yes, Kelly loses this one, obviously more, and more impactful environmental disasters, complete with a global pandemic.
However, I think it’s interesting to look at what the conditions were. It’s telling that societal collapse was defined with three areas that have less to do with more tech versus less, and more to do with the loss of value/wealth held by the monied. Economic collapse and a devaluing of currency would, really, impact the daily lives of the poor less than the wealthy. Rebellion by the poor against the rich is obvious, but is that societal collapse? Really? And then environmental catastrophe as a sign of societal collapse is vague, but can definitely be viewed through the same prism of lost monetary value, particularly considering the major environmental disasters of the current time, and of the time of the bet were a combination of industrial mishaps, or rising sea and coastal storms.
As an aside, was the great depression a societal collapse? Were regime changes like the communist revolutions societal collapses? Major upheavals, yes, but not sure they were collapses.
Kevin Kelly, prepare to hand it back:
3 Likes
I wouldn’t say civilization is better than it was 25 years ago. Neoliberal extractive economies and the collapse of American democracy – I write this during the mob occupation of the Capitol in response to POTUS’ direction – if not made possible, then made easier by tech and social media.
And if the bet was serious, Steve Levy wouldn’t be the sole judge but there should have been a panel from varied backgrounds. That the judge was a the writer is proof that the bet was a joke.
1 Like
The main reason that the judge decided that Kelly had one, was because the bet had originally been worded as “Economic collapse AND class war AND ecological disaster”. ie, all three predictions would have to be correct for him to win. If any one of them weren’t correct then Kelly won.
As the judge gave each of them one and a half (NO to economic collapse, YES to ecological disaster, and 50/50 on class war), then overall Sale lost.
Without that wording, I’d say they were both wrong, and should both have to pay $1000 to a charity of the other’s choice.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
