MAHDOOD on Nostr: There is a belief that ideologies drive mass human change. This is extremely ...
There is a belief that ideologies drive mass human change. This is extremely misguided. Mass adoption of an ideology can only spread if it is accompanied by a powerful technological innovation. For example, many people believe that the major problems with the family unit are caused by feminism. Feminism advocates for women’s equality: the right to work and live freely. However, feminism has been around since the 1700s. Why weren’t the problems that we face today with the family unit around back then? Some will say that propaganda pushed it forward but propaganda has also been around for a long time (i.e. early 1900s). The shift came after a new technology was invented: birth control. This new technology allowed feminism to flourish. For the first time, women were able to remove the risk of pregnancy associated with sex. This allowed them to delay childbearing in order to pursue an education and career. Their status in society benefitted as they now have more power (e.g. economic, political) than ever before.
However, this came with tradeoffs. Women are now significantly more likely than men to graduate from high school and college. Single women are 40% more likely to own a home than are single men. And for the first time in history, childless women under 30 are outearning men in the same demographic in many urban centers. A common complaint I hear from women is that there are no real men left. Sadly, women’s dissatisfaction with the quality of men has more to do with the elevation of their status as women than a degradation in the quality of men. Evolutionary change takes thousands of years. It doesn’t make sense to assume that men are different now. But we do know for a fact that circumstances have changed. An average salary isn’t appealing to a woman anymore. When a woman had no salary before, or was pregnant, an average salary was appealing. But reality has changed. Why would a woman settle for a man making less money than her? Why would she settle for a man who barely outearns her? It doesn’t make sense and this is why birth rates and marriage rates have declined. It’s not an issue of morals, but of incentives.
If you’re not convinced that technologies drive mass change, rather than ideologies, consider these other examples. The Protestant movement is credited for an enlightened period of questioning religious authority. But the questioning of authority did not begin with Martin Luther. People have always questioned authority. It only became possible at a mass scale when the printing press was invented. Without the printing press, the Protestant movement would’ve died like other attempts to question authority that came before it. Capitalism, the drive to accumulate capital, always existed throughout human history. Hunter-gatherers would accumulate berries and other important resources for future use. But capitalism didn't provide any significant mass benefits to humanity yet. The ideology didn’t take off until the steam engine made it possible to transact at large scale.
It’s not difficult to see why people would assume these ideologies are what created mass change for humanity. But a close examination of the technologies that emerged show a humbling reality: technology allows an ideology to flourish.
This reality leads to some important conclusions. Advocating for a new ideology is mostly a waste of time. Trying to convince people to fight for things like freedom, hard money, and privacy is never going to result in mass changes. It is good for small changes but if you want to change the world, you need to offer a technology that humans cannot ignore.
Ideologies like libertarianism and anarchism have existed for a long time but are relatively unpopular. Will bitcoin be the technology that finally allows these ideologies to flourish and finally end the state?
However, this came with tradeoffs. Women are now significantly more likely than men to graduate from high school and college. Single women are 40% more likely to own a home than are single men. And for the first time in history, childless women under 30 are outearning men in the same demographic in many urban centers. A common complaint I hear from women is that there are no real men left. Sadly, women’s dissatisfaction with the quality of men has more to do with the elevation of their status as women than a degradation in the quality of men. Evolutionary change takes thousands of years. It doesn’t make sense to assume that men are different now. But we do know for a fact that circumstances have changed. An average salary isn’t appealing to a woman anymore. When a woman had no salary before, or was pregnant, an average salary was appealing. But reality has changed. Why would a woman settle for a man making less money than her? Why would she settle for a man who barely outearns her? It doesn’t make sense and this is why birth rates and marriage rates have declined. It’s not an issue of morals, but of incentives.
If you’re not convinced that technologies drive mass change, rather than ideologies, consider these other examples. The Protestant movement is credited for an enlightened period of questioning religious authority. But the questioning of authority did not begin with Martin Luther. People have always questioned authority. It only became possible at a mass scale when the printing press was invented. Without the printing press, the Protestant movement would’ve died like other attempts to question authority that came before it. Capitalism, the drive to accumulate capital, always existed throughout human history. Hunter-gatherers would accumulate berries and other important resources for future use. But capitalism didn't provide any significant mass benefits to humanity yet. The ideology didn’t take off until the steam engine made it possible to transact at large scale.
It’s not difficult to see why people would assume these ideologies are what created mass change for humanity. But a close examination of the technologies that emerged show a humbling reality: technology allows an ideology to flourish.
This reality leads to some important conclusions. Advocating for a new ideology is mostly a waste of time. Trying to convince people to fight for things like freedom, hard money, and privacy is never going to result in mass changes. It is good for small changes but if you want to change the world, you need to offer a technology that humans cannot ignore.
Ideologies like libertarianism and anarchism have existed for a long time but are relatively unpopular. Will bitcoin be the technology that finally allows these ideologies to flourish and finally end the state?