Editing Sāmatvārtha - the Vision (section)

==== '''Why Sāmatvārtha over Effective/Accelerationism/Altruism''' ====
Effective Accelerationism (aka e/acc) is a reactionary meme against Effective Altruists (aka EA). Without going much into the noise of half-baked origins of these alleged ‘philosophical’ movements, the key current thing that triggered the recent wave of manifesto wars is advancements in Artificial Intelligence (or Intelligence Amplification per Andrew Karparthy), and how fast or openly should it be pursued.

In a nutshell, the Altruists (EAs) worry about poly-crisis; that humanity is facing multi-pronged risks - some existential per se - which might break their silos and spillover to cause great misery. The Accelerationists (E/ACCs) worry about the stagnation of humanity - which according to them might cause great misery as well.

The E/ACCs attempted to root their meme into a philosophical framework by basing it on the nature of entropy. To advocate for accelerated change, this was an attempt to counter the altruism thesis right at the foundations. While it seemed promising at the beginning, it soon fell into the traps of any American discourse and in regard to EAs - of false, extreme, unnecessary polarization.
 '''Their outright rejection of the concerns shared by degrowth-ers regarding poly-crisis, or the belief that the ‘techno-capital’ machine will solve everything just by ‘accelerating’ everything, is naive at best or sinister at worst.'''
Post-AI economics will not magically solve the problem of human consensus on the metastories. Both EAs and E/ACCs seem to be victims of Western meta stories, that of selfish genes and thus either requiring over corrections that EAs prefer or blind acceleration that e/acc have started to vouch for!

Accelerationism and Altruism themselves have a very mixed-bag memetic history. Indic futurism therefore needs a better call to action than the singular monotheist manifestos. One which can accommodate the harmonious prosperity this land will strive for, one not based on the meta-narrative of the selfish gene, but that of [https://www.brhat.in/dhiti/dharmikagene The Dhārmika Gene]. One that is mindful of its deep civilizational itihāsa, [https://www.brhat.in/dhiti/dharmikagene The Bhāratāyan]. One that is ready to leapfrog to a solar-punk Indic-futurism.

Thinking that only commoditizing consumerism can sustain the economic growth cycle required for technological progress is the mistake that E/ACCs make. This is at odds with degrowth-ers, who want the world humans to consume less because of their ecological impact. But won’t things align if the proposition becomes to use technological accelerationism for de-growing consumerism’s externalities?

You don’t need to sell everyone a large cyber truck to be pro-climate change, and the irony of it should not be lost on supposed American capitalists. A society which roots its economy so deeply in consumerism will only lead to harmful accelerationism. Social media is the biggest example. The digital fentanyl is not just limited to TikTok as they say, but Instagram, YouTube, Tinder and the biggest of them all - Porn. Making this a USA vs China issue, or capitalism vs socialism issue etc. is disingenuous and won’t help anyone.

On the other hand, you also cannot expect India and Africa to live in poverty and lower standards of living because Europeans want to degrow and impose a carbon tax. Irony might be lost to the West, but the global south will not ignore this new age of imperialism and digital colonialism. So degrowth-ers’ affection for the effective/altruists’ control concentration approach will never sit well. They need to fight centralisation, not advocate for it.

It is not paradoxical to be not against markets but against ‘marketing’; be not against growth but against ecological exploitation; be not against profits but against singular profit motive; be not against stakeholder capitalism but against ESG™; be not against consumption but against hedonism; be not against social governance but against state fascism; be not against pluralism but against universalism and intersectionality.

Thus, without falling into the traps of these false debates, can we just simply ensure we don’t repeat the pitfalls of imperialist capitalism, consumeristic hedonism, fascistic socialism, universalist intersectionality, and modernist metaphysics?

Authored by Moberation.
Published by Brhat.[[index.php?title=Category:Philosophy]][[Category:Philosophy]]