Waking Up to the Technocratic Nightmare
Humanity Facing Technological Uprush: Exploring Continuism as a Philosophical Approach
Want to avoid the robotic, AI-dominated future from becoming our grim reality? As technology continues to advance, it's time to take a hard look at who's at the helm and where we're headed.
It's high time for a united stand against the looming technocratic tyranny, and here's a rallying cry for preserving humanity as we know it.
In the spirit of raising awareness about the near-dystopian future lurking just around the corner, our local team of volunteers distributes The Light newspaper, displaying slogans on yellow boards. A puzzled public often asks about our cause, given our motley messages about cash, Net Zero, farming, censorship, militarism, geoengineering, and digital surveillance.
Occasionally, we get hecklers who label us as tin-foil hat conspiracy theorists or right-wing lunatics. To those who take the time to inquire, we simply state our goal as 'freedom.' Who couldn't support that? (Though it seems many do, as the Covid-19 debacle demonstrated)
As we've seen through the left versus right theatre that dominates our political landscape, freedom is a vague concept that's easier said than defined. Conservatives interpret it as a rallying call against censorship of traditional values, while progressives view it as a call for open borders and relief from 'hate.'
On the surface, it might seem that conservatism and progressivism are fundamentally opposed. But amidst the Green and Woke onslaught on our very humanity, I argue that preservation is worthy and necessary, while blind acceptance of change is reckless.
To the progressives who claim the "tradition" mantle, I ask, what is the destination? Scratch the surface of the quintessential middle-class, virtue-signaling progressive, and you'll find an unconditional embrace of any tradition-threatening change. (George Orwell would likely categorize them as conformists, much like earlier conservatives).
Mostprogressives, armed with a distasteful snobbery for the lower classes, lack the critical thinking to understand the driving forces behind the changes they support. They are against traditional capitalism, often crying "follow the money," but they can't see the emerging new world order that's neither ideological nor materialistic in nature.
That order is a technocratic, top-down transhumanist regime, guided by the little-known philosophy of accelerationism.
In the 1970s, the dreams of the original technocracy movement became more than just a possibility, thanks to the rapid development of computers. But technological transformation of society would confront human nature's ingrained tendencies. In his 1970 book, Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era, Zbigniew Brzezinski envisioned a society "shaped culturally, psychologically, socially, and economically by the impact of technology and electronics." He elaborated on this: -
Richard Gardner, in a 1974 article in the Council on Foreign Relations journal Foreign Affairs, outlined a "hard road to world order," a process of quiet stealth with episodes of chaos, exploiting the "booming, buzzing confusion" we've seen with events like 9/11 or the Covid-19 pandemic.
Brzezinski was aware of the prophecy of Alvin Toffler, author of Future Shock (1970). Although Toffler didn't use the term, his writing was seminal to the accelerationist movement, a strategy later championed by Nick Land at Warwick University and others.
Accelerationists believe that technology must be sped up, rather than introduced gradually. Instead of addressing the social consequences of rapid change, they endorse and seek more disruption.
Accelerationists are blissfully unaware of the political struggle between left and right, using it to distract the general public. "Politics," according to Land, is "the last great sentimental indulgence of mankind."
Elon Musk and his followers, including late capitalist Colin P. Powell and the alt-right, are embracing this philosophy, accelerating social, economic, and technological change recklessly. Meanwhile, the left has only begun to take notice of the World Economic Forum's technocratic agenda, including Klaus Schwab's "Great Reset" and his scientific advisor Yuval Noah Harari's advocacy for hacking human brains and the eradication of the soul.
To embrace accelerationism is to negotiate an existential threat to humanity. We need a philosophy for humanity's survival, and Covid-19 skeptic David Fleming's recent concept of "continuism" might just be the answer.
Continuism is a philosophy that prioritizes preserving all that is human. It's not intended to ignore change or to preserve a golden age, but rather to address human problems with human solutions. Fleming conveys the principles of this philosophy in a charter for human continuity, which includes the following ten principles: -
- Humanity is not a flaw to fix
- We claim the right to endure and remember
- Technology must empower, not erase, humanity
- We care for the Earth without surrendering to control
- The body Is the root of being human
- Local communities are the heart of life
- We seek truth through attention and inquiry
- We build cooperation amid diversity
- We protect what deserves to endure
- We do not answer to economic or technocratic systems
Continuism offers a way forward for all who believe in human answers to human problems, transcending political ideologies. Fleming's charter provides a roadmap for preserving our humanity in the face of accelerating technocratic change.
We must stop naively believing that our existential issues will just work themselves out. Fleming asserts that, "the technocratic class now possesses every tool it needs for total behavioral control: the internet for infrastructure, 5G and Wi-Fi for coverage, smartphones for tracking, and AI for simulation and enforcement." The control grid is already in place, and idealism about the human spirit will not save us.
Accelerationism is the philosophical pitch of the transhumanists, but it's time for a new pitch: one for humanity's survival. Join the movement for continuism.
- The exposure of the technocratic, top-down transhumanist regime could challenge the uncritical embrace of artificial intelligence and technology, promoting debate about the role of technology in shaping our future and preserving the essence of human freedom.
- As we strive for a free and open society, the concepts of free speech, health, and truth should be deeply rooted in the dialogue about the impact of technology and science on our lives.
- The tenets of continuism, such as prioritizing the preservation of humanity, encouraging human solutions to human problems, and ensuring technology serves humanity rather than erasing it, could potentially serve as a counterbalance to the reckless accelerationism of AI and technological advancement.
- In the face of accelerating change, it is essential to support philosophies, like continuism, that prioritize the preservation of human values, freedom, and truth amidst the sea of technological developments and emerging artificial intelligence systems.
