Transhumanist Party

Maybe but it is important to update the government and law for the coming world to prevent abuse by the state or the people. Imagine if mind control became a thing and no laws to stop it from being done? People would not be able to even vote against it because they would be mind controlled by then.

...

Well corporations have to supply it to the government for them to even use it.

If you can control minds, it's game over anyway. You win.

This already happened. Just ask the average person where they get information to make decisions.

But isn't the system itself subject to material reality? Some say we we are not able to impletment communism because we're not living in a post-scarcity era, and we're living under capitalism precisely because we live under scarcity conditions… doesn't technology already change the system as it progresses?

Honestly I think I like it more then the Green party's platform. The most worrying thing is the emphasis on the use of private companies to provide the frame work for this stuff. If they adopted some stuff from technocracy Inc with the Democratic principals they already have. I think they'd have a really compelling platform. As it stands now, they're way better then the mainstream parties but I don't think they're policies would be very successful. If they had existed in the the late 70s and China hadn't opened itself up for trade. I think they could have done really well.

They're always going to have that emphasis on the use of private companies because of their ties to the old Extropians, who were pretty hardcore American libertarian types. It's part of the pedigree.

Yes. Engines alone turn the wheels of history. Human societies converge on the systems that are most effective within the boundaries of their possible actions, which are determined by their technological advancement.

I wrote "any time soon", not never.

Higher cost of human labour (directly tied to the labour laws, Socialist movements and so on) gives much better incentive to maximize efficiency of human labour. I.e. use more robots.

So far we have companies outsourcing work to Third World and getting job done there extra-cheap. We need to wait until robots become sufficiently cheap to compete with hourly wage of $1-2 that requires much less electricity and maintenance.

Oh that's a shame. Their platform actually has a lot of strong policies outside of the libertarian stuff. The UK branch of the party seems to have more social democratic policies.
transhumanistparty.org.uk

Yeah, it's a little disappointing. As a philosophical transhumanist I'd like to see a party that pushes hard for the sort of forward-looking technological agenda we endorse, but at least in the anglosphere the majority of the transhumanist community is made up of the meta-contrarian types who gravitate to libertarianism or, more recently, the alt-right. (See: pre-diaspora Less Wrong.)

If you're looking for a less libertarian flavor of transhumanism, you could check James Hughes' book "Citizen Cyborg" which outlines his ideas of "democratic transhumanism"…his views are more social-democratic than socialist, but as I argued in some comments in the thread at archive.is/yVYKg , if you have fully automated production and a basic income, the distinction between the two may start to break down.

I'm also a transhumanist and very disappointed by the political views of the average transhumanist. It's especially disappointing because Luxury Communism is cleary the ultimate end goal for most transhumanist even if they don't realize it. Technocracy Inc is the closest platform I can think of that pushes anti- capitalists transhumanist policies and unfortunately it has a very authoritative side to it.

Not that poster but thanks for the link.

You'd figure that a group of massive technology and philosophy wonks would realize that capitalism is an entropic trap that encourages the exchange of moral value for economic value and becomes increasingly anti-human as technology advances. It's like they actually want to become Genejacks.

I don't see why they can't be nudged in the right direction. At least someone must be open to other views. However if they still refuse to give up private companies wouldnt an alternative be to encourage an incentive that would encourage development of more co-ops?

You'd think but that's not the case. It's just like environmentalist that cant see that capitalism is the major problem preventing any big changes from taking place. It isn't a conversation they want to have.

The green party has recently shifted to a co-op friend platform. I don't see why the transhumanist also can't be nudged I'm the same direction but I have no idea how we do it.

motherboard.vice.com/read/do-we-really-hate-trump-and-clinton-so-much?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

huffingtonpost.com/zoltan-istvan/the-culture-of-transhuman_b_7022406.html

So he seems to critique both capitalism and communism so he could be nudged with the right wording from someone knowledgeable enough. Maybe Zoltan can be contacted via social media. He doesn't seem to post much on his twitter but he might be paying attention to his facebook. He mentioned disliking Reddit so I have doubts if he would do an AMA there. Alternatively someone could contact a well known communism supporter and suggest for them to speak to the transhumanist party in person.

thoughtless degenerates

and they will gladly

Well I don't have Twitter or Facebook to try and contact him. An email to their website probably wouldn't do any good. Contacting a well known leftist to ask them to open up a line of dialogue with him sounds like a decent course of action. Maybe someone like Richard Wolff?

I've posted this in every single one of your threads and there has yet to be a rebuttal. Good luck anyway, enjoy your new Dev Gods.

why are they thoughtless and degenerates, this shit seems good.

also

You dying would be cool too

Does transexistence a meme yet

I'm not that person

Can the transhumanist party garuntee me a suit of Dr. Doom armor or have any esoteric undertones? If not, I can't in good faith sign on.

Possibly but who can manage to convince them to have a discussion?

Transhumanism will guarantee you brain enhancements which will allow you to realise that capeshit is shit.

anti-natalist party is god-tier

The Esoteric Order of Dagon will bring communism to Innsmouth.

I'a Dagon! I'a Hydra!

COPY ME FOR LUXURY COMMUNISM

youtube.com/watch?v=9FxJbZ9uXiw

Little reminder that Zoltan rides around in a bus that looks like a coffin as a big fuck you to death

Lolberts at the core

A bit but there is other things they do that no lolbert would ever want. Nothing wrong with wanting to streamline how the government works. Hell we don't even have electronic voting in a ton of states and they hand count that shit.

These two are mathematically incompatible.

Flat tax has multiple meanings so I'm not quite sure what one they are talking about

Well, technically you could take a fixed percent of everyone's income and then divide it out equally between everyone. It would rather defeat the point of a flat tax though.

This will happen in 30 years anyway, and I doubt very much it'll reduce the size or the cost.

LOL deciding government policies based on ivory tower utopianist predictions of the future

what the fuck is partial direct democracy? You mean the swiss system?

this is just labor quotas under a pretentious cause

DURR DURR Y R THE PEOPLE WHO'S JOB IT IS TO INTERPRET THE LAW OVER REPRESENTED IN THE JOB THAT REQUIRES DEEP UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW

are we talking about stripping the electoral college now?

Universal Basic Income for every American (taking care to devise a plan that does not enlarge the government). A properly set up UBI could eliminate welfare, social security, and dozens of other major government programs.

lol this is just a meme platform by this point. And I love how they've deluded themselves into thinking they can just sweep away social security medicaid welfare food stamps etc just like that as if it wouldn't take multiple fucking elections just to take one of those things off.

making the internet a utility wouldn't be the worst thing in the world but what the fuck are 'online citizens'?

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

If you're going to do a point-by-point breakdown, it helps if you actually have more than one or two good counterpoints. Most of that post was just inane non-arguments.

Here's an interview with some prominent transhumanist on their feelings about democratic socialism.

I do not describe myself as a “Democratic Socialist”, since I see problems with both terms. I am a Social Futurist, or Technoprogressive. I strongly support democracy but think it needs deep reform, and am wary of what is often meant by “Socialism” but strongly support an emphasis on enriching the community and supporting its citizens. This third way or “radical centrist” position is reflected in the ideas of the Transhumanist Party in the UK and Europe.

>Khannea Suntzu: Socialism is not a single thing. It is a diffuse concept. I only know I label myself a Socialist-Libertarian, along the lines of Noam Chomsky, and I wholeheartedly agree when Chomsky says ‘Socialism’ and the entire intellectual socialist ideological movement in the US ended up in the equivalent of concentration camps. youtube.com/watch?v=E1MrbSNeLBw.

ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/pellissier20150520

asshurt transhumie detected

please tell me why it's a good idea to decide government policy in the present based off of an unfounded prediction heavily debated upon in the current scientific community?

this isn't climate change we're dealing with; this is retooling the entire economy of the nation based off of a fucking meme.

Only a party in 2016 can be so deluded.

The overwhelming majority of experts agree that automation will cause widespread unemployment within the next 50 years.
Any government which doesn't plan for that is unfit for leadership.

Also, I was mainly talking about all the other bits of your post such as
and
They're entirely devoid of substance.

no they don't

there's not even a consensus on it's impact, if there will be an impact, or how big that impact will be. It's an extremely understudied field.

You fell for the meme headlines and Keynesian fantasies (yeah, your technological unemployment fantasies are actually quite a bit older than your meme headlines let on - they date back to the 50's and 60's when automation first started to be a thing)

www2.itif.org/2013-are-robots-taking-jobs.pdf

oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/downloads/academic/The_Future_of_Employment.pdf

Have multiple viewpoints on the subject, though I know you'll just pick the ones that agree with you and go from there. It is most certainly not an overwhelming majority in agreement in one direction or the other however.

Science is not a tool to be exploited to make political talking points. Unfortunately, retards from both the right and the left love to abuse it to be so.

I hope you'll forgive me for treating that first link with a degree of suspicion. The ITIF are nothing more than a neo-liberal think tank. One of their stated goals is to oppose Keynesian economics.
itif.org/issues
I could find an equally trustworthy report on why climate change isn't caused by human actions.

When I talk about experts I'm talking about the people designing the machines. They're the ones who actually understand what the technology will be capable of. Economists always approach the issue by looking at previous technological advances, but I've never seen any of them suggest what kind of new jobs could appear in a post-automation world. The article talks about productivity gains as if they were a few percent, not a few orders of magnitude. It's fundamentally bad science to try to extrapolate from past trends when the fundamental rules have massively changed between then and now. The entire section which attempts to address the increasing rate of technological advancement consists of them sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting "LALALA THE SCIENTISTS ARE ALL WRONG, JOBS ARE HARD, AI IS PROBABLY IMPOSSIBLE LALALALA". They literally cite a bunch of economists to try and prove that the engineers designing automation systems are wrong about the technology they're developing.

Anyway, it's clear you're going to dismiss this post so I'm not sure why I bothered writing it. Have a nice day.

Surprised I didn't post this first. Not a big fan of what the party is currently.