Political systems are historical constructions, not immutable necessities. Their persistence does not establish their continuing adequacy.
Political systems are historical constructions, not immutable necessities. Their persistence does not establish their continuing adequacy.
We have constructed a civilisation in which recognising existential risk has become another reason to continue producing it.
This is the triumphal stagnancy of technological overreach: extraordinary technical acceleration coupled to an increasingly repetitive behavioural repertoire.
The machinery does not need to fail. It only needs to keep working in ways that make more of itself necessary.
Technocratic complexity and populist caricature are parts of the same feedback loop. Each produces the conditions that sustain the other.
A healthy society expects children to become adults. An unhealthy one encourages adults to remain immature.
We are passing a turning point at which the value of human cleverness becomes actively obscured and wilfully excluded by technocratic over-reach.
The institutions assigned to solve our deepest problems are sustained by these, the very relations they are unable and/or unwilling to question.
Ideology may not be the primary problem. The deeper question is what kind of world produces the need for the identities that ideology can stabilise.
Enlightenment begins where the search for certainty ends.
The task is not to create perfect agreement, but to maintain enough shared coherence that a society can continue solving problems without tearing itself apart.
There is, at present, a strange cultural requirement to pretend that billionaires are evidence of societal success rather than evidence of systemic imbalance.