This paper aims to demonstrate the contemporary relevance of Adorno’s thought for business ethicists working in the critical tradition by showing how his critique of modern social life anticipated, and offers continuing illumination of, recent technological transformations of capitalism. It develops and extrapolates Adorno’s thought regarding three central spheres of modern society, which have seen radical changes in light of recent technological developments: work, in which employee monitoring has become ever more sophisticated and intrusive; leisure consumption, in which the algorithmic (...) developments of the culture industry have paved the way for entertainment products to dominate us; and political discourse, in which social media has exacerbated the anti-democratic tendencies Adorno warned of in the mid-twentieth century. We conclude by presenting, as a rejoinder to these developments, the contours of an Adornian ethics of resistance to the reification and dehumanisation of such developments. (shrink)

Capitalism and technology, working for each other, like the two-headed monster Janus and also like a transnational condominium, have both created various machines that enslave us all by transforming human life on earth. What follows is a brief historical sketch of how capital and technology brought this about.

Beyond Capitalism: Designing a New Economic System for Humanity -/- Introduction -/- For centuries, capitalism has been the dominant economic system, driving technological innovation, wealth creation, and global trade. However, its flaws—extreme inequality, environmental destruction, and economic instability—have made many question whether it is still the best model for humanity. Instead of reforming capitalism, perhaps the time has come to replace it entirely with a new system that better aligns with modern challenges, human well-being, and sustainability. -/- This essay explores (...) a new economic model that moves beyond capitalism and socialism, aiming for a system that is fair, sustainable, and technologically advanced. -/- Why Capitalism Must Be Replaced -/- Capitalism’s fundamental flaws make it unsustainable in the long run: -/- 1. Wealth Inequality and Economic Injustice -/- The richest 1% own more than half of the world’s wealth, while billions struggle in poverty. -/- The capitalist system prioritizes profits over people, leading to worker exploitation and economic instability. -/- 2. Environmental Collapse -/- Capitalism’s endless growth model is destroying the planet through deforestation, pollution, and climate change. -/- Corporations prioritize short-term profits over long-term sustainability. -/- 3. Automation and AI Disrupting Jobs -/- Millions of jobs are being replaced by artificial intelligence and automation. -/- The capitalist system does not account for a future where human labor is no longer essential. -/- 4. Psychological and Social Problems -/- Consumerism creates stress, anxiety, and social isolation by equating happiness with material wealth. -/- The fear of financial instability keeps people trapped in low-quality jobs and debt cycles. -/- Given these issues, capitalism is no longer fit for the future. A completely new economic system must be built—one that values sustainability, equality, and technology-driven efficiency. -/- Introducing a New Economic System: The Post-Capitalist Model -/- A new economic model must prioritize human well-being, technological efficiency, and ecological balance over profit. Below is a blueprint for a post-capitalist society. -/- 1. A Resource-Based Economy (RBE) -/- A Resource-Based Economy (RBE) is an economic model where all goods and services are freely available based on need, rather than money or trade. -/- Technology and AI manage resources efficiently, eliminating the need for money. -/- Automation handles labor, allowing people to pursue education, research, and creativity. -/- No private ownership of land or resources, only shared community access based on sustainability. -/- 2. Universal Basic Infrastructure (UBI 2.0) -/- Instead of just giving people money (UBI), a new system would provide universal basic needs, including: -/- Free housing, healthcare, education, food, and clean energy for all. -/- Advanced AI-driven logistics to distribute goods and services efficiently. -/- 3. Decentralized AI Governance -/- Rather than governments being controlled by corporations or corrupt politicians, AI and collective intelligence could ensure fair and transparent decision-making. -/- AI algorithms could optimize resource distribution, prevent waste, and eliminate financial corruption. -/- Direct democratic participation, where people vote on policies using secure blockchain systems. -/- 4. Sustainable, Circular Economy -/- Zero waste policies, where everything is recycled, reused, or repurposed. -/- Focus on degrowth—reducing unnecessary production while increasing quality of life. -/- Energy-efficient smart cities, where transportation, housing, and food production are automated. -/- 5. Post-Work Society: Emphasizing Purpose Over Jobs -/- In a post-capitalist economy, people would not be forced to work meaningless jobs just to survive. Instead: -/- People could focus on science, philosophy, arts, personal growth, and social well-being. -/- Education would be lifelong and freely available. -/- AI and robots would handle most labor, leaving humans free to explore their full potential. -/- How This System Would Solve Capitalism’s Problems -/- Challenges in Transitioning to a Post-Capitalist Economy -/- While this system solves capitalism’s biggest problems, transitioning away from capitalism would face major challenges: -/- 1. Resistance from the Wealthy Elite -/- Billionaires and corporations control most of the world’s resources and political systems. -/- They would fight to maintain power, delaying or sabotaging systemic change. -/- 2. Psychological and Cultural Shifts -/- People have been conditioned to associate money with survival and success. -/- A new system would require re-educating society on cooperation, sustainability, and shared abundance. -/- 3. Technology and Infrastructure Development -/- Large-scale AI, automation, and sustainable energy infrastructure would need global investment. -/- Governments and private companies must be convinced to prioritize long-term sustainability over short-term profit. -/- The Path Forward: Steps to Build a Post-Capitalist World -/- While the transition will not happen overnight, we can begin moving toward a post-capitalist future by taking the following steps: -/- 1. Implement Universal Basic Income (UBI) Now -/- Governments can start by providing a safety net while transitioning to a money-free economy. -/- Countries like Finland and Canada are already experimenting with UBI programs. -/- 2. Expand AI and Automation for Public Good -/- AI should be used to reduce labor burdens, not to enrich corporations. -/- Governments should invest in open-source AI that benefits all of society. -/- 3. Develop Smart Cities and Circular Economies -/- Cities should be designed for zero waste, renewable energy, and efficient transportation. -/- Governments must ban planned obsolescence and require full recycling of consumer products. -/- 4. Decentralize Power Using Blockchain and Direct Democracy -/- Blockchain voting systems can eliminate election fraud and political corruption. -/- AI-assisted governance can help make fair, data-driven policy decisions. -/- 5. Redefine Education and Human Purpose -/- Schools should move away from job training and focus on creativity, science, philosophy, and social intelligence. -/- Societies should emphasize happiness, purpose, and sustainability over financial success. -/- Conclusion: A New Civilization Beyond Capitalism -/- Capitalism was a necessary stage in human evolution, but it has outlived its usefulness. The future demands a system that is more intelligent, just, and sustainable—one where: ✅ No one is forced to work just to survive. ✅ Resources are managed intelligently, not wasted for profit. ✅ Technology is used for human well-being, not corporate greed. ✅ The planet is protected, not exploited. -/- This is not utopian fantasy—it is a logical step forward in human evolution. By combining AI, automation, decentralized governance, and sustainability, we can create a post-capitalist society where everyone thrives. -/- The question Is no longer “Should we replace capitalism?” The question is: “How soon can we build a better system before capitalism destroys us all?” -/- . (shrink)

As civil liberties are shredded and powerful corporate and political force engage in a range of legal illegalities, the state itself becomes a model for corruption and violence. Violence has become not only the foundation of corporate sovereignty, it has also become the ideological scaffolding of common sense. Under casino capitalism, the state has become the enemy of justice and offers a prototype for types of misguided rebellion that mimic the lawlessness enshrined by corporate sovereignty and the repressive state apparatuses. (...) Under such circumstances, the force of action does not reside in deliberation, compassion, justice, equality and freedom. The state of exception has become the rule serving to legitimate illegality and normalizing violence and force as the only mediating dynamic worth utilizing to solve problems. In addition, subjectivity itself has become both hyper-masculinized, transformed, and subordinated to the celebration of an aggressive, violent and hyper-competitive war machine. Evidence of the hardening of the culture and the ongoing visibility of a pathological form of hyper-masculinity abounds in polices that amount to a permanent war on the poor, women, immigrants, workers, public servants, Muslims, poor minorities and those adults marginalized by class and race. Casino capitalism's paranoiac and increasingly repressive institutional and ideological apparatuses live in fear of dissent, critical rationality and the possibility of collective struggles moved by the desire for justice and a radical democracy. This is precisely where questions about education and resistance connect to broader debates about producing critical agents capable of acting as engaged and responsible citizens in a substantive democracy. Neoliberalism, as a dominant ideology, changed not only ways of thinking, but, consequently, practices. Evidently, a process of transformation like the one imposed by the hegemony of neoliberal ideology does not take place without resistance-conscious or not-and here it is the role of the State (and its ideological apparatus) in the subjection of individuals. For Fisher, there is no element that shows that the public actually embraced neoliberal doctrines with enthusiasm. For Mark Fisher, capitalist realism is \\\"an expression of class decomposition, and a consequence of class disintegration\\\". The phenomenon resulting from this discontent that finds few ways to express itself that are not individual is named by Mark Fisher as the \\\"privatization of stress\\\", which easily converts into depression and other psychological suffering. Although both its neoliberal and neoconservative components are opposed to bureaucracy in favour of privatised decentralisation, in practice capitalist realism involves the normalisation of bureaucracy and the creation of additional and unnecessary labour. Although pyramidal hierarchies are flattened, the increase and establishment of constant communication through technology has led to people at the same level surveilling each other. (shrink)

Capitalism has become able to appropriate economically and quantitatively our “qualitative field of life” and to destroy and create social relations based on debt mechanisms. In parallel, technologies such as blockchain are expected to disrupt business practices and social interactions as they are currently conceived. For Brian Massumi, blockchain is what we need to resist capitalism and escape its pervasiveness, as it can help us “reinvent” the concept of value within broader collective arrangements. In this article, the author argues against (...) this assumption; blockchain is still inadequate for effectively resisting the pernicious effects of capitalism, and decentralized technologies cannot replace the hard work of politics. (shrink)

This book is a personal answer to the crisis of the left. The author of this text belongs to a generation habituated to live with global explanations. During our youth, the future of the world was the future of democracy and socialism. We belong to a generation of “leftist” that found in Marx and Freud, phenomenology and structuralism the most important answers that made sense of the everyday world. However, the developments of events during the last sixty years showed that (...) our confidence was ungrounded. The depreciation of the theoretical thought accelerated in direct proportion to the development of technologies, and among them the impact of the digital developments was devastating. One of the most notable consequences of the digitalization of culture was the depreciation of the Marxian thought, but also the less recognized depreciation of all kinds of political-economic thought. The collapse of the world created before the Second World War open for the end of the “grand narratives” and the enthronization of Postmodernism. The production of fragmentary explanations took over the historical perspective with an important influence on social and economic thought. After 60 years of postmodern thinking, we believe that the time of Postmodernism is over. Politicians and economists over the world cannot continue to produce results in small packages. The whole picture must be restituted. Of course it must be done incorporating the lessons of the past to avoid to make the same mistakes. Postmodernism has left behind lots of scattered modernist philosophical remnants. It left a chessboard with only few pieces to work with, and in this allegory, only as references. The philosophical schools remains, but the study of them is strictly for an education in the history of ideas. The situation is aggravating since the most important works from the 1960’s and forth, (post-structuralists) deliberately have avoided obvious identity patterns. A word in Rio de la Plata’s jargon language describes this situation, cambalache, a sort of “flea market” where everything lies higgledy-piggledy. Deconstruction and the focus on differences are vital to Postmodernism. Remaining is therefore the intersections, the contrasts, shadows, and sketches. When trying to orient in such an intellectual environment, the task reminds of patching scatterings, and building with tools of eclecticism. However, we believe that is time to reconstruct instead of deconstruct, moving back to Modernism that we will describe as Cyborgism. (shrink)

The Post-Capitalist Economic System and the Need for a Smaller Population -/- Introduction -/- As humanity transitions from capitalism to an entirely new economic system—one that moves beyond market-driven competition and profit motives—the necessity of large population growth diminishes. In a post-capitalist era, advanced automation, sustainable resource management, and decentralized economic structures will replace traditional labor and consumption-based economies. Unlike capitalism, which thrives on constant economic expansion and a growing workforce, the new system will prioritize stability, efficiency, and well-being. As (...) a result, excessive population growth will no longer be an economic or social necessity. -/- 1. The Shift from Labor-Intensive to Automated Economies -/- In a capitalist system, economic growth relies on an increasing workforce to produce goods and services. However, with the rise of artificial intelligence, robotics, and automation, human labor is becoming obsolete in many industries. The new economic system will be built on automated production, reducing the need for a large working population. Instead of focusing on job creation, economies will emphasize efficient distribution and sustainable production. With most essential goods and services provided through automation, a smaller population will be sufficient to maintain economic stability and ensure high living standards. -/- 2. Decentralized and Self-Sustaining Economic Models -/- Post-capitalist economies are likely to move away from centralized production hubs and multinational corporate control. Instead, decentralized, community-based economies will emerge, utilizing localized manufacturing, vertical farming, and renewable energy. With decentralized production systems, societies can produce what they need without relying on mass production and excessive consumption. This shift eliminates the need for a large consumer base, allowing smaller, self-sufficient populations to thrive without the pressures of economic expansion. -/- 3. Abandoning the Growth-Based Economic Model -/- Capitalism depends on continuous economic growth to sustain itself, which requires both increasing consumer demand and a growing workforce. In contrast, post-capitalist systems will focus on steady-state economics—where stability, resource efficiency, and long-term sustainability take priority over perpetual growth. With advanced technology ensuring abundance, there will be no economic necessity for population growth to fuel demand or labor supply. A stable or slightly declining population will be more compatible with a system that values sustainability over expansion. -/- 4. Redefining Wealth and Economic Value -/- The new economic system will likely redefine wealth and value, shifting away from monetary accumulation and towards access-based models. Universal basic income (UBI), resource-sharing economies, and AI-managed economic planning will ensure that people’s needs are met without requiring constant employment. In such a system, economic success will be measured by well-being, sustainability, and innovation rather than GDP growth. A smaller population will allow societies to focus on improving quality of life rather than producing and consuming endlessly. -/- 5. Sustainability and Ecological Balance -/- A smaller population aligns with the principles of environmental sustainability. Overpopulation leads to deforestation, pollution, and climate change due to excessive demand for food, energy, and housing. In a post-capitalist system, where ecological balance is prioritized, maintaining a smaller, stable population ensures that planetary resources are used efficiently without depleting the environment. With resource management driven by AI and automation, societies can optimize production and consumption without relying on mass labor or overpopulation. -/- 6. Shifting from Work-Centric to Well-Being-Centric Societies -/- The capitalist economy forces people to work long hours to survive, often at the expense of personal well-being. In a post-capitalist system, work will no longer be a necessity for survival. Automation and AI will handle most production, while people focus on creativity, innovation, and social well-being. A smaller population makes it easier to implement shorter workweeks, universal healthcare, and lifelong education, ensuring that individuals have more time for meaningful activities rather than being trapped in labor-driven economies. -/- 7. Political and Social Stability in a Smaller Population -/- Overpopulation often leads to overcrowded cities, housing shortages, and strained healthcare and education systems. A post-capitalist system that prioritizes balance over growth will benefit from a manageable population size, reducing social conflicts and political instability. With fewer people, governments can better allocate resources, provide quality public services, and implement long-term planning without the constant pressure of growing demand. -/- Conclusion -/- In an entirely new economic system that moves beyond capitalism, excessive population growth is unnecessary. Automation, sustainability, decentralized production, and a shift away from growth-based economies will make it possible for smaller populations to live fulfilling, resource-efficient lives. Instead of relying on an ever-growing workforce and consumer base, post-capitalist societies will prioritize well-being, stability, and environmental balance, ensuring that humanity thrives without the burden of overpopulation. -/- . (shrink)

Abstract in English, German, French and Croatian -/- In the paper “The ‘Bubbling Up’ of Subterranean Politics in Europe”, which was published in 2013 in the Journal of Civil Society, Mary Kaldor and Sabine Selchow attempted to reveal the specific qualities of the uprisings which emerged after the year 2010 in some European countries, such as Germany, Spain, Italy, England etc. According to the authors, the mode of organization which forms the main body of these emancipatory movements obtains its (...) basic logic from the world of the Internet. The use of the Internet requires a re-evaluation of negative philosophical commentary regarding technology. In the context of twentieth-century philosophy, Martin Heidegger and Herbert Marcuse are the most influential philosophers who studied the negative aspects of technology. Heidegger portrayed the destructive effects of scientific reasoning and technology on the Western culture through the criticism of the traditional Western metaphysics on a phenomenological-ontological level. Marcuse, belonging to the tradition of Western Marxism, formed his critique of technology in the context of the concept of instrumental rationality and the critique of advanced industrial society and capitalism. Although the starting points of their perspectives on technology and the underlying purposes of their critiques of technology were different, it may be asserted that both have a rather negative and almost entirely pessimistic disposition towards technology. Heidegger’s and Marcuse’s criticisms of technology will be discussed in this context and the differences and similarities between these criticisms will be shown. Finally, the paper will emphasise the question of the possibility of a positive role of technology. Technology can serve as an alternative to negative uses by shedding light on the relation between the current uprisings and the Internet. Keywords technology, rationality, freedom, enframing, criticism, revolt movements, Internet, politics //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /////// Ist die Emanzipation des Menschen durch Technologie möglich? Zusammenfassung In dem Artikel „The ‘Bubbling Up’ of Subterranean Politics in Europe”, veröffentlicht im Jahre 2013 im Journal of Civil Society, versuchten Mary Kaldor und Sabine Selchow die spezifischen Qualitäten der Aufstände zum Ausdruck zu bringen, die nach 2010 in den europäischen Ländern ausbrachen – Deutschland, Spanien, Italien, England usw. Nach Ansicht der Autoren erhält der Modus der Organisation, der den Hauptkörper dieser emanzipatorischen Bewegungen bildet, seine grundlegende Logik aus der Welt des Internets. Die Analogie mit dem Internet erfor- dert eine Neubewertung der negativen Kommentare über die Technologie aus philosophischer Perspektive. Martin Heidegger und Herbert Marcuse sind die einflussreichsten Philosophen, die sich mit den negativen Aspekten der Technologie in der Philosophie des 20. Jahrhunderts befasst haben. Heidegger schilderte die zerstörerischen Auswirkungen der wissenschaftlichen Vernunft und Technologie auf die westliche Kultur durch die Kritik an der traditionellen abend- ländischen Metaphysik auf der phänomenologisch-ontologischen Ebene, während Marcuse, ein Mitglied des westlichen Marxismus, seine Kritik an der Technologie im Rahmen des Konzepts der instrumentellen Rationalität und der Kritik der fortgeschrittenen Industriegesellschaft und Kapitalismus geformt hat. Obgleich die Ansatzpunkte ihrer Perspektiven über die Technologie und die zugrunde liegenden Zwecke ihrer Kritik an der Technologie unterschiedlich waren, kann behauptet werden, dass beide eine eher negative und fast völlig pessimistische Einstellung zur Technologie hatten. In diesem Zusammenhang werden Heideggers und Marcuses Kritiken an der Technologie diskutiert sowie Unterschiede und Ähnlichkeiten zwischen den beiden Kri- tiken aufgezeigt. Abschließend unterstreicht das Paper die Frage nach der Möglichkeit einer positiven Rolle für die Technologie, die als Alternative zur negativen Perspektive dienen kann, indem sie Licht in das Verhältnis zwischen aktuellen Aufständen und Internet bringt. Schlüsselwörter Technologie, Rationalität, Freiheit, Gestell, Kritik, Revoltebewegungen, Internet, Politik //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /////// L’émancipation humaine est-elle possible à travers la technologie ? Résumé Dans l’article « The “Bubbling Up” of Suberranean Politics in Europe » publié en 2013 dans Journal of Civil Society, Mary Kaldor et Sabine Selchow tentent de mettre en lumière les caractéristiques spécifiques des révoltes qui ont fait jour après 2010 dans certains pays européens – Allemagne, Espagne, Italie, Angleterre, etc. Selon nos auteures, le mode d’organisation qui a formé le corps essentiel de ces mouvements émancipatoires tire sa logique de base du monde de l’internet. Cette analogie avec l’internet requiert une réévaluation, à partir d’un point de vue philosophique, des commentaires négatifs sur la technologie. Martin Heidegger et Herbert Marcuse sont les philosophes les plus influents ayant travaillé sur les aspects négatifs de la technologie au sein de la philosophie du XXe siècle. Heidegger a dépeint les effets destructeurs de la raison scientifique et de la technologie de notre culture occidentale à travers son criticisme de la métaphysique traditionnelle occidentale à un niveau phénoménologico-ontologique, tandis que Marcuse, membre du « communisme occidentale », a formé une critique de la technologie au sein du concept de rationalité instrumentale et une critique de la société industrielle avancée et du capitalisme. Bien que le point de départ de leur perspective sur la technologie et que le but sous-jacent de leur critique diffèrent, il est possible d’affirmer que leur point commun est d’avoir posé un regard négatif et presque entièrement pessimiste sur la technologie. À cet égard, le criticisme d’Heidegger et de Marcuse vont être abordés afin d’en soulever les différences et les similarités. Enfin, cet article mettra l’accent sur la possibilité d’un rôle positif de la technologie qui pourrait servir d’alternative aux perspectives négatives en faisant la lumière sur le lien entre les révoltes actuelles et l’internet. Mots-clés technologie, rationalité, liberté, mettre en forme, criticisme, mouvements de révolte, internet, politique //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /////// Je li moguća ljudska emancipacija kroz tehniku? Sažetak U članku »The ‘Bubbling Up’ of Subterranean Politics in Europe«, objavljenom 2013. u časopisu Journal of Civil Society, Mary Kaldor i Sabine Selchow pokušale su otkriti specifične značajke pobuna koje su se javila nakon 2010. godine u europskim zemljama poput Njemačke, Španjolske, Italije, Engleske itd. Prema autoricama, način organiziranja koji čini glavno tijelo ovih emancipatornih pokreta preuzima svoju osnovnu logiku iz svijeta Interneta. Analogija s Internetom zahtijeva ponovnu evaluaciju negativnih komentara o tehnici iz filozofske perspektive. Martin Heidegger i Herbert Marcuse najutjecajniji su filozofi 20. stoljeća koji su se bavili negativnim aspektima tehnike. Heidegger je prikazao destruktivne učinke znanstvene racionalnosti i tehnike na zapadnu kulturu kroz kritiku tradicionalne zapadne metafizike na fenomenološko-ontološkoj razini, dok je Marcuse, kao predstavnik zapadnoga marksizma, oblikovao svoju kritiku tehnike u kontekstu pojma instrumentalne racionalnosti te kritike razvijenog industrijskog društva i kapitalizma. Iako su polazišne točke njihovih pogleda na tehniku, kao i osnovne svrhe kritike tehnike, različite, može se reći da obojica imaju poprilično negativno i gotovo u potpunosti pesimističko shvaćanje tehnologije. U tom će se kontekstu razmotriti Heideggerova i Marcuseova kritika tehnike kao i razlike i sličnosti između tih dvaju pristupa. Zaključno će rad naglasiti mogućnost pozitivne uloge tehnike, koja može služiti kao alternativa negativnoj perspektivi osvjetljavajući odnos između nedavnih pobuna i interneta. Ključne riječi tehnologija, racionalnost, sloboda, postav, kritika, pobunjenički pokreti, Internet, politika. (shrink)

This thesis studies the enabling properties of ICT and their effects and potential for social change, and prepares the ground for a sustainability-oriented ethico-political assessment of this technology. It primarily builds on interdisciplinary scholarship to describe and explain the multifaceted co-evolution between the global deployment of ICTs and the emergence of the Information Society, understood as a socioeconomic restructuring of capitalism. Beyond the role of ICTs in this regime transition, the thesis delivers other philosophical insights about crucial aspects of ICT (...) development, applications and management. These include arguments about how we should conceptualize ICTs on the basis of their different roles in extending human communication and in performing or facilitating the remote control of humans and animals, machines and systems operations; about the entanglement between telecommunications, transport networks, urban development and work and organization; and about the relations between ICTs, culture and human values. Examples are offered to illustrate the potential that these empirical and philosophical lessons may hold for the construction of a framework for the ethico-political assessment of ICTs. (shrink)

Following media-theoretical studies that have characterized digitization as a process of all-encompassing cybernetization, this paper will examine the timely and critical potential of Günther Anders’s oeuvre vis-à-vis the ever-increasing power of cybernetic devices and networks. Anders has witnessed and negotiated the process of cybernetization from its very beginning, having criticized its tendency to automate and expand, as well as its circular logic and ‘integral power’, including disruptive consequences for the constitution of the political and the social. In this vein, Anders’s (...) works, particularly his magnum opus Die Antiquiertheit des Menschen [The Obsolescence of Man], sheds new light on the technologically organized milieus of the contemporary digital regime and also highlights a new form of cybernetic ‘conformism’. The goal of the essay is therefore, not only to emphasize the contemporary nature of Anders’s thought but also to use it to frame a critique of current neo-technocratic and, ultimately, post-political concepts, such as ‘algorithmic regulation’, ‘smart states’, ‘direct technocracy’, and ‘government as platform’. This essay argues that cybernetic capitalism is causing what Anders terms ‘ Unfestgelegtheit’ to disappear; that is, we are losing the originary possibility of technologically (re-)structuring our world in alternative ways, particularly given the determinist character of current technologies. (shrink)

This paper argues that histories of the Green Revolution are often underpinned by commitments to theoretical models of technology and science which shape the parameters of such narratives in politically normative ways. This paper explores the accounts of the Green Revolution in India given by Vandana Shiva and Govindan Parayil and demonstrates the ways in which these accounts are influenced by their models of technology and science. It is argued that Shiva and Parayil represent key theoretical positions in technological theory, (...) determinist and instrumentalist, respectively, and that examination of their Green Revolution narratives clearly indicates the ways in which such theoretical commitments can determine the scope and content of analyses of technology-driven development, and thereby exclude political content necessary for the evaluation of the efficacy of such development and the validity of the theoretical model. (shrink)

The processes of computation and automation that produce digitized objects have displaced the concept of an image once conceived through optical devices such as a photographic plate or a camera mirror that were invented to accommodate the human eye. Computational images exist as information within networks mediated by machines. They are increasingly less about what art history understands as representation or photography considers indexing and more an operational product of data processing. Through genealogical, theoretical, and practice-based investigation, this dissertation project (...) traces a lineage of computation through images from early cybernetics to contemporary machine learning under algorithmic capitalist conditions of political economy. Objects include mundane examples such as smartphone cameras to sublime examples such as the imaging of black holes. It articulates new conditions and forms of perception and surveillance that result from contemporary technological development in computation. The project builds on theorists of computational media such as Friedrich Kittler, Wendy Hui Kyong Chun, Jussi Parikka, Shane Denson, and Alexander Galloway to examine the interplay between perception, computation, and epistemology. Further theoretical contribution builds on the work of Luciana Parisi and Jacques Ranciére’s articulation of aesthetics, and Michel Foucault’s gesture towards a heterotopia. Finally, it draws from Donna Haraway’s metaphors of the cyborg and sympoiesis to frame the capacity of art to transfigure the limitations of digital network culture into new possibilities for being. Here, it curates practices by Danielle Brathwaite-Shirley, Harun Farocki, Morehshin Allahyari, and Pierre Huyghe. (shrink)

The technological revolution and appropriation of internet tools began to reshape the material basis of society and the urban space in collaborative, grassroots, leaderless, and participatory actions. The protest squares’ representation on Television screens and mainstream media has been broad. Various health, governmental, societal, and urban challenges have marked the advent of the Covid-19 virus. Inequalities have become more salient as poor people and minorities are more affected by the virus. Social distancing makes the typical forms of protest impossible to (...) carry out. Under social distancing, some state-led policies took advantage of social media to focus on the Covid-19 pandemic to silence social and political activities, censor criticism, and control the press. However, during the pandemic era, the movements for social justice have been particularly active, focusing on defending workers’ rights, mutual aid and solidarity, monitoring policymakers, and popular education. These progressive movements combined concrete practices and experiences to confront the reactionary, capitalist, and governmental actors that sought to shape and envision the world. Through different case studies of protest movements during the pandemic in Europe, the UK, and Asia, this paper argues that at the time of rising racial, social, and economic inequalities, the social activities adapted to the circumstances determined by the social distancing and the impossibility of people gathering in physical spaces. Subsequently, the people in different countries had various individual and collective responses to the support of health workers, systemic inequalities, loss of jobs, and other societal and financial challenges imposed by the governments. It means that, rather than disappearing, the social movements have adapted to the unexpected situations during the pandemic outbreak. The pandemic broke the new digital global wave of protests in this sense. (shrink)

This article draws on Bernard Stiegler and Gilbert Simondon’s work to further interrogate the psychic, social, and political problems raised by the development of Artificial Intelligence. Stiegler’s political philosophy of time-consciousness reveals three concomitants urgencies: human memory is conditioned by industrial supplements that are increasingly disruptive, capitalism has produced an entropic condition where life on earth is threaten by toxic systems, the deployment of technologies of spirits has striped individuals of their psychic and collective individuation. I read media theory along (...) with Simondon’s philosophy to elucidate the question of mediation in today’s reticulated AI-driven society. (shrink)

From a socio-theoretical and media-theoretical perspective, this article analyses exemplary practices and structural characteristics of contemporary digital political campaigning to illustrate a transformation of the public sphere through the platform economy. The article first examines Cambridge Analytica and reconstructs its operational procedure, which, far from involving exceptionally new digital campaign practices, turns out to be quite standard. It then evaluates the role of Facebook as an enabling ‘affective infrastructure’, technologically orchestrating processes of political opinion-formation. Of special concern are various tactics (...) of ‘feedback propaganda’ and algorithmic-based user engagement that reflect, at a more theoretical level, the merging of surveillance-capitalist commercialization with a cybernetic logic of communication. The article proposes that this techno-economic dynamic reflects a continuation of the structural transformation of the public sphere. What Jürgen Habermas had analysed in terms of an economic fabrication of the public sphere in the 1960s is now advancing in a more radical form, and on a more programmatic basis, through the algorithmic architecture of social media. As the authors argue, this process will eventually lead to a new form of ‘infrastructural power’. (shrink)

In this paper, we analyze the origin of the links between global bioethics (which we differentiate from biomedical bioethics) and human rights. We understand that we are in a global civilizational crisis, whose roots extend to 1492 today, in which the modern-capitalist model used the discourse of human rights to justify its predatory technocracy. There are three theoretical assumptions that support our analysis: 1) The current conditions in which the technique shows its destructive power over nature (Anthropocene) indicate that none (...) of the ethical antecedents are applicable to such circumstances. In this new context, the kantian categorical imperative has been reconverted into a moral and political duty to not instrumentalize either human beings or nature. We call this new ethical consideration bioethics. 2) The current geopolitical composition of the world must be thought in terms of the global North and the global South, as two regions that are forged in the midst of important processes of globalization of the world-system, and whose main consequence lies in the absence of equity in the distribution of wealth and well-being between the two. 3) The current environmental crisis or climate change, the product of an economic model based on extractive technology, has become one of the most serious threats against human rights. (shrink)

This "text" discusses how capitalism, colonialism, and trauma are linked to various present-day crises, including issues related to civic engagement, environmental collapse, addiction, and collective trauma. The work argues for the inevitability of universalism by going through a history of how neoliberalism colonized the world and our minds. After surveying these various crossroads of contemporary precariousness, the crises of strategic intimacies, and the paralysis of endless reductionist calculi, in this work we will come to acknowledge how between the nightmares of (...) history and a technologically overdetermined and ecologically devastated future, an examination of civic life must start from within the throngs of devotees so mesmerized by the circulations of global finance. Out of a mélange of conflicting paradigms, I look to two prevailing belief systems that underpin the most populous language-cultures of the internet; which both locate each other from the utmost periphery of one another; both have underlying religious ideologies that may aid in the acculturation of inclusive institutions which work to affirm differences among their respective congregations. Encountering a convergence from the utmost periphery from the other, gives each perspective the potential to see how they are in a “constitutive relationship with (their) own outside,” to question their own universality, as well as realizing the inadequacies that come from within" (Balibar, 36). After analyzing the political implications of the philosophies of Hegel and Spinoza, in relation to Christian and Confucian theologies, I end by admonishing "us" to take responsibility as inscribers of ritual to heal ghosts of collective trauma. (shrink)

Since philosophical problems are the result of our innate psychology, or as Wittgenstein put it, due to the lack of perspicuity of language, they run throughout human discourse and behavior, so there is endless need for philosophical analysis, not only in the ‘human sciences’ of philosophy, sociology, anthropology, political science, psychology, history, literature, religion, etc., but in the ‘hard sciences’ of physics, mathematics, and biology. It is universal to mix the language game questions with the real scientific ones as to (...) what the empirical facts are. Scientism is ever-present and Wittgenstein, arguably the greatest intuitive psychologist of all time, has laid it before us long ago, beginning with the Blue and Brown Books in the early 1930’s. Language is programmed in our genes and is involved in nearly all our social behavior. Philosophy in the strict sense (i.e., academic philosophy), is as Wittgenstein showed us, the study of the way language is used (language games) and I regard it as the descriptive psychology of higher order thought (i.e., pretty much everything involving language which is often called System 2 or slow thinking). However, as I hope I have shown in my writings over the last decade, nonlinguistic behavior or System 1 or fast thinking is also described with language and this leads to endless confusion which I have tried to clarify here and which is summarized in the tables that I present. It is my contention that the table of intentionality (rationality, mind, thought, language, personality etc.) that features prominently here describes more or less accurately, or at least serves as an heuristic for, how we think and behave, and so it encompasses not merely philosophy and psychology, but everything else (history, literature, mathematics, politics etc.). Note especially that intentionality and rationality as I (along with Searle, Wittgenstein and others) view it, includes both conscious deliberative linguistic System 2 and unconscious automated prelinguistic System 1 actions or reflexes. I provide a critical survey of some of the major findings of two of the most eminent students of behavior of modern times, Ludwig Wittgenstein and John Searle, on the logical structure of intentionality (mind, language, behavior), taking as my starting point Wittgenstein’s fundamental discovery –that all truly ‘philosophical’ problems are the same—confusions about how to use language in a particular context, and so all solutions are the same—looking at how language can be used in the context at issue so that its truth conditions (Conditions of Satisfaction or COS) are clear. The basic problem is that one can say anything, but one cannot mean (state clear COS for) any arbitrary utterance and meaning is only possible in a very specific context. I analyze various writings by and about them from the modern perspective of the two systems of thought (popularized as ‘thinking fast, thinking slow’), employing a new table of intentionality and new dual systems nomenclature. I show that this is a powerful heuristic for describing behavior with critical reviews of the writings of a wide variety of behavioral scientists (i.e., everyone). The first group of articles attempt to give some insight into how we behave that is reasonably free of theoretical delusions. In the next three groups I comment on three of the principal delusions preventing a sustainable world— technology, religion and politics (cooperative groups). People believe that society can be saved by them, so I provide some suggestions in the rest of the book as to why this is unlikely via short articles and reviews of recent books by well-known writers. (shrink)

Purpose. Our study aims at developing a conceptual model of transdisciplinary synthesis of philosophical-anthropological, sociopolitical and epistemological aspects of co-evolution of the scientific and technical designs of High Hume class and the socio-cultural / political context in the process of anthropo-socio-cultural genesis. The relevance of the topic is justified by the technologization of all spheres of human existence and the emergence of High Hume class technologies, which can be called technology-driven equally. As a result, the concepts of "bio-power" and "biopolitics" (...) have become ones of the most frequently mentioned in modern philosophical and anthropological discourse and attract increasing attention of philosophers, sociologists, and, in the last decadecades, experts in the field of practical political science and economics (Foucault, Agamben, Žižek, Kebnik, Nadesan, etc.). Theoretical basis. It is problem-theoretical research; We synthesize the results of our publications in recent years. We proceed from the fact that the main question of the informational phase of the development of a technogenic civilization lies in the rationalization and technologization of the evolutionary process, i.e. in the removal of the fundamental ontological antinomy “Evolution versus Reasonable Design”, as a result for modern neoliberal political democracy, biopower and its theoretical understanding (biopolitics) are effective tools and technologies to form of optimal trends of the global evolutionary process, in the framework of this ideological system. We have chosen the comparative conceptual analysis combining with the results of the content analysis of Web publications by the main method of the study. Originality of the research is in the fact that the central core of such a model is the use of a conceptual and terminological apparatus for describing the mechanisms of the progressive evolution of complex systems, known as the “triple spiral” by Ledeisdorf-Itskovich. This allowed us to integrate the bio-power phenomenon into the general scheme of a stable evolutionary strategy of a technogenic civilization. The conclusions. We justified the transformation of biopolitics into the main factor in the global evolution of self-organizing human-sized systems, including the biosphere as a whole. This is achieved through the creation of a specific (bio) ethical system of imperatives and the activities of individuals in relation to themselves and other agents of social actions. Bioethics with a trail of associated conceptual areas (biosociology, bioeconomics, biohistory, etc.) turned out to be the only rationalized regulator of the process of biological and sociocultural evolution. The triple spiral biotechnology – bioeconomy – bioenergy as the material substance of the life of technological civilization is reflected in the ideal world as a triad of bioethics – biosociology – biopolitics. Both triads form closed cycles of evolutionary transformations that transmit and amplify the initial momentum of transformations on each other through a cascade mechanism with positive feedback. (shrink)

The Philosophical Contribution of Kostas Axelos: The Issue of the Open System and Technological Civilization -/- Kostas Axelos (1924–2010) remains one of the most intriguing and underexplored figures in contemporary philosophy. His work, situated at the crossroads of Marxism, Heideggerian phenomenology, and the philosophy of technology, raises critical questions about the nature of modern civilization and the fate of thought in an increasingly technological world. One of the central academic issues in Axelos’ thought is his concept of the "open system," (...) which presents a radical alternative to both dialectical materialism and structuralism. This issue is especially relevant in our age of digital globalization and algorithmic governance, as it poses fundamental questions about the limits of human autonomy and the possibilities of thought in a technologically determined world. -/- The Open System: A Critique of Closed Philosophical Paradigms -/- Axelos’ notion of the "open system" challenges traditional metaphysical and epistemological assumptions that rely on closure, determinacy, and finality. Unlike Hegelian dialectics, which seeks resolution through synthesis, Axelos proposes a dynamic, ever-unfolding process that resists totalization. His critique extends to Marxist orthodoxy, which he argues falsely assumes a teleological closure in history. By advocating an open-ended view of reality, Axelos aligns himself with thinkers like Nietzsche and Heidegger, emphasizing a world in flux rather than one governed by fixed structures or ultimate goals. -/- This issue raises critical academic debates: How can philosophical thought remain relevant in an era dominated by technological systems that impose rigid structures on human existence? Is the "open system" a viable framework for understanding contemporary globalized societies, or does it risk devolving into an abstract and impractical relativism? -/- For Axelos, closed systems—whether philosophical, political, or scientific—seek to impose rigid frameworks that ultimately stifle thought and creativity. He sees Western metaphysical traditions as largely obsessed with categorization and finality, which leads to an artificial separation between subject and object, mind and world, theory and practice. In contrast, his "open system" embraces indeterminacy and fluidity, recognizing that reality is in perpetual motion and that any attempt to fix meaning within rigid boundaries leads to intellectual stagnation. -/- Axelos’ concept also engages with existentialist and phenomenological traditions, particularly in how it resists essentialist definitions of being. He challenges not only the dogmas of classical metaphysics but also structuralist tendencies that seek to analyze reality in terms of fixed codes and relationships. Instead, Axelos suggests that the world should be understood as a game (le jeu du monde), a process of continuous becoming where human existence is not predefined but rather shaped by the interactions of open-ended forces. This issue raises critical academic debates: How can philosophical thought remain relevant in an era dominated by technological systems that impose rigid structures on human existence? Is the "open system" a viable framework for understanding contemporary globalized societies, or does it risk devolving into an abstract and impractical relativism? Furthermore, how does Axelos' open system relate to contemporary discussions of complexity theory, cybernetics, and ecological thinking, all of which emphasize the interconnectedness and dynamism of systems? -/- A related issue in Axelos' work is his analysis of technological civilization. In Le Jeu du Monde (The Play of the World), he argues that technological advancement has not only transformed human existence but has also reshaped the very way we think and conceptualize reality. Technology, in Axelos’ view, is not merely a tool but a fundamental mode of being that structures our world and thought processes. -/- This raises significant academic concerns about autonomy, alienation, and the role of philosophy. If technology governs human thought as Axelos suggests, can there be genuine freedom in intellectual and political life? How does one resist technological determinism without retreating into romanticized notions of pre-technological existence? Axelos does not advocate for a rejection of technology but rather calls for a new form of thinking that embraces its presence while resisting its totalizing tendencies. -/- Axelos highlights the paradox of technological civilization: while it offers immense possibilities for connectivity, knowledge production, and efficiency, it also risks subordinating human creativity and autonomy to systemic logic. He critiques the way in which technology, rather than serving human purposes, increasingly dictates them—turning individuals into passive participants in a mechanized world. The dominance of algorithmic governance, artificial intelligence, and automation exemplifies the culmination of this technological destiny, raising profound concerns about the future of human agency. -/- Furthermore, Axelos’ thought resonates with contemporary debates about digital culture, surveillance capitalism, and the commodification of knowledge. As digital technologies reshape the nature of labor, communication, and governance, the question arises: To what extent can individuals maintain authentic engagement with the world when technological mediation defines nearly every aspect of existence? In this sense, Axelos anticipates concerns found in posthumanist and critical media theories, particularly regarding the erosion of subjectivity in the face of ever-expanding cybernetic systems. -/- Another crucial aspect of Axelos’ critique is the way in which technological civilization imposes a fragmented, instrumentalized view of knowledge. He challenges the reduction of thought to mere data-processing and the dominance of specialized, compartmentalized disciplines that fail to grasp the holistic nature of existence. By contrast, his open system philosophy encourages a mode of thinking that resists fragmentation and embraces a planetary perspective, one that acknowledges the interrelation of philosophy, science, politics, and art in an ever-evolving world. (shrink)

Herbert Marcuse was one of the most influential political philosophers in the 20th century. After his death, his popularity started decreasing and the philosopher somewhat sank into oblivion. This dissertation intends to investigate the Marcusean contribution to the subject of technics, so imbricated on his political philosophy, and demonstrate that it deserves reappraisal. We shall analyse the theoretical context of Marcuse’s work and put opposing stances, both technophobe and technophile, up for debate. The intent is to not only present the (...) topics that organized this discussion back in its day, but also to set Marcuse apart from such hardline approaches. We shall then elucidate the Marcusean criticism of the capitalist technological system of advanced industrial societies and present the fundamental lines of its new historical project, supported by a qualitative change made possible by the ambivalence of technics. Since, in Marcuse’s view, technics configure the basis for the organisation of the status quo, and also the basis which might modify it if duly reoriented, the ambivalent character which the philosopher identifies in technics becomes the nuclear idea in his thesis; it is the very foundation upon which he builds his philosophy of technics. The marcusean thoughtshall then be exposed to critique: we shall examine the most relevant objections raised against it, but also its most fruitful ideas. Through the contributions of Gorz and, more specifically, of Feenberg, we intend to confirm the relevance of Marcuse’s thought in the context of the hodiern technological reality. (shrink)

To speak about revolution, either as an event or as a concept, must appear presumptuous at a moment when racial discrimination, fascist politics, and the totalitarian war against women and minorities are amplified by a market economy based on systemic division. In the digital present, the systematization of division is magnified by newly algorithmic structures of machinic capitalism. In that context, the more the intellect aims to grasp the depth of revolutionary actions, the less the latter seem to make (...) sense. In other words, both the failure and the promise of revolution have created a modern paradigm to address the political struggles of our times, one that is cyclically repeating itself to challenge the limits of humankind. And yet, one can always find reasons to interrogate the symptoms of revolutionary tragedies that proliferate against a background of intellectual numbness. (shrink)

Departing from the conventional readings of Karl Marx’s Capital and other of his works, by way of François Laruelle’s “radicalization of concepts,” Katerina Kolozova identifies a theoretical kernel in Marx’s thought whose critical and interpretative force can be employed without reference to its subsequent interpretations in the philosophical mainstream. The latter entails a process of abstracting a philosophical legacy — or rather, of putting it in brackets — and then codifying a history of a learned interpretation established in supposed fidelity (...) to the theoretical project of a “master.” Interpreting the master implies a mastery of doctrinal tools, which results in establishing a catechism of the Logos of the Master. And this catechism interferes, Kolozova argues, with more direct encounters with Marx’s writings. As we know, Marx’s rigorously descriptive language unravels the radical core of capitalist economic processes and, through that unraveling, also reveals capitalism’s necessary exploitation and subjugation of human labor. Toward a Radical Metaphysics of Socialism attempts to recuperate and emancipate the notion of metaphysics in this scenario by virtue of radicalizing thought’s encounter with the Real. Kolozova argues that this metaphysical drama is at the origin of the social and economic injustices of contemporary global economic-political realities, and she illustrates this state of affairs in discussions of the problem of wage labor, automated speculation as the core of late capitalism, the post-2008 financial crisis, the status of technology in late capitalism, sexual difference and gender, and the human and non-human body’s subjugation capitalist automation. (shrink)

Often associated with themes in political philosophy and aesthetics, the work of Jean-François Lyotard is most known for his infamous definition of the postmodern in his best-known book, La condition postmoderne, as incredulity towards metanarratives. The claim of this article is that this famous claim of Lyotard is actually embedded in a philosophy of technology, one that is, moreover, still relevant for understanding present technoscience. The first part of the article therefore sketches Lyotard’s philosophy of technology, mainly by correcting three (...) common misconceptions: that La condition postmoderne would only be about metanarratives, whereas in fact, it is mainly about what replaces them, namely performativity; that performativity would be shorthand for capitalism, whereas in reality, capitalism is the latest instance of a longer history of performativity; and that Lyotard’s reflections on science and technology would be restricted to this book alone, whereas in reality, a well-articulated philosophy of technology, centered around the concept of technoscience, is found in his later work. The second part of the article then aims to highlight the contemporary relevance of this philosophy of technoscience through a brief examination of two contemporary technosciences: synthetic biology and data science. (shrink)

Throughout the 20th century, market capitalism was defended on parallel grounds. First, it promotes freedom by enabling individuals to exploit their own property and labor-power; second, it facilitates an efficient allocation and use of resources. Recently, however, both defenses have begun to unravel—as capitalism has moved into its “platform” phase. Today, the pursuit of allocative efficiency, bolstered by pervasive data surveillance, often undermines individual freedom rather than promoting it. And more fundamentally, the very idea that markets are necessary to achieve (...) allocative efficiency has come under strain. Even supposing, for argument’s sake, that the claim was true in the early 20th century when von Mises and Hayek pioneered it, advances in computing have rekindled the old “socialist calculation” debate. And this time around, markets—as information technology—are unlikely to have the upper hand. -/- All of this, we argue, raises an important set of governance questions regarding the political economy of the future. We focus on two: How much should our economic system prioritize freedom, and to what extent should it rely on markets? The arc of platform capitalism bends, increasingly, toward a system that neither prioritizes freedom nor relies on markets. And the dominant critical response, exemplified by Shoshana Zuboff’s work, has been to call for a restoration of market capitalism. Longer term, however, we believe it would be more productive to think about how “postmarket” economic arrangements might promote freedom—or better yet, autonomy—even more effectively than markets, and to determine the practical steps necessary to realize that possibility. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:What's so Important about Music Education?Leonard TanJ. Scott Goble, What's so Important about Music Education? (New York, NY: Routledge, 2010)In What's so Important about Music Education, J. Scott Goble proposes a new philosophical foundation for music education in the United States based on the theory of semiotics by American pragmatist Charles Sanders Peirce. Following a brief summary, I will note several merits in Goble's book before sketching four (...) recommendations for future editions.In Chapter One, Goble notes how the inclusion of non-Western musics in the public schools as espoused in the 1967 Tanglewood Declaration has raised two crucial questions: "Whose music should be included in the curriculum?" and "What is the role or social importance of public school music education in the United States as a postmodern society?" Noting that music education was established in the United States during the modern era, and that the Tanglewood Declaration did not account for vast differences in beliefs about music, Goble argues that there is a need to establish a new philosophical foundation that can accommodate the varied beliefs and practices of diverse cultural groups in postmodern United States.In Chapter Two, Goble sketches and critiques five cultural anthropologists. Of the five, he singles out Clifford Geertz's conception of culture as "semiotic [End Page 201] webs" (p. 20) as the conceptual foundation that is appropriate for this study. He then links Geertz's notion of culture to the semiotic theory of C. S. Peirce which is to become the theoretical underpinning of the book. Subsequently, he unpacks many key Peircian themes: human conceptions are maintained not individually but collectively in cultural groups, provisional truth (as opposed to absolute Truth) is relative and dependent on conceptions of communities, and the scientific method is the sole mode of inquiry by which people in communities may use to satisfy their doubts to formulate beliefs. Most importantly, Goble expounds the "pragmatic maxim" that since humans live in communities united by common beliefs, "the 'clear' meaning of an idea held by a member of the community will almost inevitably stem from the beliefs—or ways of understanding—held by members of that community" (p. 30). Goble concludes the chapter by presenting the Peircian semiotic system of cognition which posits that a "sign" is conceptualized in a triadic relationship: the Sign or "Firstness," the Object or "Secondness," and the Interpretant or "Thirdness" (p. 33).In Chapter Three, Goble considers how music is a sign based on the theoretical framework laid in Chapter Two. Drawing on the work of ethnomusicologists, anthropologists, psychiatrists, and a neuroscientist, he formulates a Peircian pragmatic approach to musical practices which posits that "the musical practices of different cultural communities represent a diverse cluster of community-specific ritualized behaviors involving sound" (p. 252). Furthermore, each of the musical practices "serves those persons who meaningfully participate in it as a means of psychophysiological, psychosocial, and/or sociopolitical equilibration relative to the worldview—or ordered conception of Reality—they tacitly share" (p. 252). For Goble, this pragmatist conception of musical practices is neither ethnocentric, universalist, nor relativist, and can serve as a conceptual framework for all diverse musical practices in postmodern United States.With the Peircian pragmatic conception in mind, Goble examines historical factors that contributed to current conceptions of music in the United States in Chapter Four. He laments that as a result of European Enlightenment and three socio-political phenomena in the United States (the separation of church and state, promotion of no other worldview than democracy, and adoption of democratic capitalism), music is no longer pragmatically oriented but trivialized and pursued by self-serving musicians.In Chapter Five, Goble traces the philosophical justifications for music education throughout the history of the United States. While the sign "musical practice" was conceptualized as "worship" in colonial America, the sign "music" was conceived as "art" during the age of Enlightenment, and as "product" during the age of science and technology. Noting that Bennett Reimer's music education as aesthetic education is limited in its Western focus on music as works [End Page 202] of artistic objects, Goble aligns his Peircian conception along praxial lines—in particular, with... (shrink)

As one of the seminal theorists further developing François Laruelle’s politically-poised “non-standard philosophy,” Katerina Kolozova’s approach to animality and feminism is part of a particular post-humanist Marxist continuum (which includes Rosi Braidotti, Luce Irigaray, Donna Haraway and N. Katherine Hayles). Nonetheless, Kolozova distinguishes herself from this lineage by adhering to Laruelle’s method, liquidating philosophy of its anthropomorphic nexus. Thus, Kolozova also belongs to a more recently inaugurated and nascent tradition, working in tandem with post-Laruellean philosophers of media, technology, aesthetics and (...) feminist critique, such as Bogna Konior, Yvette Granata, Jonathan Fardy and John Ó Maoilearca. Within this variegated assemblage, Kolozova’s most recent project, Capitalism’s Holocaust of Animals(2019), saliently reconciles and radicalizes Haraway’s epochal dyad of the “inhuman”—a bifurcation riven by technology on one node and the animal on the other—by a resolution of superlative unity. This methodology, adhering to Laruelle’s system of“synthesis-without-synthesizing” attempts to dissolve the spectral chimeras that have haunted philosophy’s metaphysical heredity, proffering a generic identity. (shrink)

On the one hand, people have witnessed a lot of amazing technological inventions and innovations in the multifaceted performances of artificial intelligence systems ever since the earliest stages of their development. Activities previously done with a lot of manual and muscular efforts are now accomplished with no sweat and just at the tip of one’s finger. I would venture to say that artificial intelligence is among the highest scientific and technological achievements of humanity in the post-modern civilization. Yet on the (...) other hand, are we worried that humanity will soon be threatened by the dark side of AI systems when the truth of the matter is long before the advent of AI, humanity has always been threatened by the evil forces of totalitarian powers well-entrenched in governments and big capitalist empires in control of nations’ economies? Future AI systems employed and mobilized in the service of these political and economic powers will certainly heighten the degree of their oppressive domination and intensify the common people’s oppression. (shrink)

The concepts of technological and innovation sovereignty open a pathway to address existing gaps in the governance of technology and innovation. Technological sovereignty aims to embed socio-political objectives within the development of technology and innovation, affecting economic governance and providing directionality of technological capacities. In this article, the concepts of technological and innovation sovereignty will be elaborated against the background of the paradigms of nation-state governance of technology, modern market-innovation and responsible innovation.

The Holistic Governance Model (HGM): A Blueprint for the Future -/- Introduction -/- Governments today face increasing challenges, from economic instability and climate change to corruption and social inequality. No single government system has fully solved these issues, but by integrating the best aspects of existing models, we can create an optimal governance system. -/- The Holistic Governance Model (HGM) is a hybrid system that combines elements from Social Democracy, Technocracy, Semi-Direct Democracy, China’s Whole-Process People’s Democracy, and the Modified Westminster (...) System. It leverages AI-driven policy-making, technocratic expertise, direct citizen participation, and long-term national planning to create a balanced, efficient, and just government system. -/- 1. Core Foundations of the Holistic Governance Model -/- The HGM is built on six fundamental pillars, ensuring that governance is efficient, democratic, and sustainable. -/- 1.1. Economic System: A Hybrid of Capitalism and State Planning -/- Inspired by: Singapore (Technocracy), China (State-Controlled Development), Nordic Model (Social Welfare), and Switzerland (Financial Stability) ✅ Key Industries Under State Control: The government regulates healthcare, energy, and transportation while allowing free-market innovation. ✅ Smart Capitalism: Entrepreneurs and businesses thrive, but AI-driven economic planning ensures fair wealth distribution. ✅ Universal Basic Assets (UBA): Instead of universal basic income (UBI), citizens receive free housing, education, and healthcare, ensuring financial security. ✅ AI-Assisted Economy: AI predicts recessions, optimizes budgets, and prevents financial crises. -/- 1.2. Political System: A Dynamic Semi-Direct Democracy -/- Inspired by: Switzerland (Direct Democracy), Westminster System (Parliament), and Singapore (Meritocratic Leadership) ✅ Two-Tier Voting System: -/- General Elections: Citizens vote for representatives every 4-5 years. -/- National Referendums: Citizens directly vote on major policies twice a year. ✅ Technocratic Advisory Board (TAB): A non-political panel of scientists, economists, and AI experts advises the government. ✅ Decentralized Local Governance: Cities and regions have autonomy while aligning with national laws. -/- 1.3. Education & Human Development: AI-Powered Lifelong Learning -/- Inspired by: Nordic Model (Free Education), Singapore (STEM Focus), and China (AI Integration) ✅ Free Public Education for Life: Every citizen has access to continuous learning, including college and skill retraining. ✅ AI-Based Personalized Learning: Students use AI tutors that adapt to their learning pace. ✅ Ethics & Critical Thinking Curriculum: Courses in philosophy, logic, and decision-making prevent misinformation and ignorance. -/- 1.4. Healthcare & Social Welfare: AI-Driven Preventive Medicine -/- Inspired by: Nordic Model (Universal Healthcare), Singapore (Tech-Driven Healthcare), and China (Mass Coverage) ✅ Government-Funded Universal Healthcare: Citizens receive free basic healthcare, with private options available. ✅ AI & Robotics in Medicine: AI diagnoses diseases early, reducing medical costs. ✅ Preventive Healthcare Policy: Citizens receive incentives for maintaining good health (fitness programs, nutrition plans). -/- 1.5. Environmental & Energy Policies: The Green Industrial Revolution -/- Inspired by: China (Renewable Energy Expansion), Nordic Model (Sustainability Laws), and Singapore (Urban Planning) ✅ Mandatory Green Technology Adoption: Businesses must comply with strict eco-friendly policies. ✅ Carbon Credit Economy: Citizens and companies earn rewards for reducing carbon footprints. ✅ 100% Renewable Energy by 2050: The government funds solar, wind, and AI-optimized energy grids. -/- 1.6. Law & Order: AI-Governed Justice & Anti-Corruption Measures -/- Inspired by: Switzerland (Independent Judiciary), Singapore (Strict Law Enforcement), and China (AI in Governance) ✅ AI-Assisted Judiciary: AI helps judges analyze case laws for fair, unbiased rulings. ✅ Zero-Corruption Policy: Public officials caught in corruption face lifetime bans from government service. ✅ Balanced Civil Rights & Security: -/- Freedom of Speech: Citizens can express opinions, but disinformation is regulated. -/- AI Surveillance for Security: AI prevents crime while protecting privacy. -/- 2. Government Structure of HGM -/- 2.1. Executive Branch: The President, Prime Minister, and Technocrats -/- President (Elected by Public Vote) → Oversees national policies and international relations. -/- Prime Minister (Elected by Parliament) → Manages daily governance. -/- Technocratic Economic Council → Expert-led economic planning. -/- AI-Assisted Policy Bureau → Uses AI for healthcare, infrastructure, and environmental policies. -/- 2.2. Legislative Branch: Semi-Direct Parliament -/- Lower House (Elected Officials) → Creates laws based on citizen participation. -/- Upper House (Experts & Regional Representatives) → Reviews laws for scientific and ethical validity. -/- Referendum System → Citizens directly vote on key national issues. -/- 2.3. Judicial Branch: AI-Assisted Supreme Court -/- Independent Court System → Ensures justice and constitutional balance. -/- AI Legal Analysis → AI helps judges analyze previous cases and evidence. -/- 3. Implementation Strategy: How to Apply HGM Worldwide -/- To implement HGM, a phased approach is needed: -/- Phase 1 (0-5 Years): Research & AI Integration -/- ✅ Establish an HGM Global Research Center to develop AI governance models. ✅ Pilot AI-assisted economic planning in select countries. -/- Phase 2 (5-10 Years): Education & Public Awareness -/- ✅ Introduce HGM-based education systems (critical thinking, AI governance). ✅ Encourage political reforms to adopt hybrid governance models. -/- Phase 3 (10-20 Years): Nationwide Policy Implementation -/- ✅ Countries gradually adopt the HGM framework, with AI monitoring national progress. ✅ Global partnerships for climate change action and digital economy growth. -/- Phase 4 (Beyond 20 Years): Global Standardization -/- ✅ Establish an HGM Alliance for international cooperation. ✅ Implement AI-driven global policies on poverty, sustainability, and digital rights. -/- 4. Why the HGM is the Future of Governance -/- The Holistic Governance Model (HGM) offers the most advanced, efficient, and democratic government system by combining AI governance, citizen participation, economic stability, and social equality. -/- Conclusion: A Government System for the 21st Century -/- The Holistic Governance Model (HGM) combines the best government systems into a single, optimized model. By implementing AI, technocracy, direct democracy, and long-term planning, HGM ensures: ✅ Efficient economic management ✅ Social equality without excessive taxation ✅ Democratic participation with AI-driven transparency ✅ Sustainable environmental policies ✅ Corruption-free governance -/- If adopted globally, HGM could transform human civilization into a more just, advanced, and sustainable society. -/- . (shrink)

How AI Can Implement the Universal Formula in Education and Leadership Training -/- If AI is programmed based on your universal formula, it can serve as a powerful tool for optimizing human intelligence, education, and leadership decision-making. Here’s how AI can be integrated into your vision: -/- 1. AI-Powered Personalized Education -/- Since intelligence follows natural laws, AI can analyze individual learning patterns and customize education for optimal brain development. -/- Adaptive Learning Systems – AI can adjust lessons in real (...) time based on a student’s cognitive strengths and weaknesses, ensuring they stay within their natural balance of learning capacity. -/- Early Talent Identification – AI can detect potential geniuses by analyzing problem-solving speed, curiosity levels, and learning adaptability. These students can then receive accelerated learning pathways. -/- Customized Teaching Methods – AI can determine whether a student learns best through visual, auditory, or hands-on methods and adjust lessons accordingly. -/- 2. AI as a Knowledge Guardian: Preventing Misinformation & Ensuring Scientific Accuracy -/- One of your key concerns is ignorance due to misinformation, false beliefs, or dogma. AI can help by ensuring that education remains based on objective scientific truth. -/- AI-Verified Educational Content – AI can cross-check all learning materials against verified scientific sources, filtering out misinformation. -/- Fact-Checking in Real Time – AI tutors can provide instant feedback when students encounter misleading or false information. -/- Automated Debate Systems – AI can train students in critical thinking by engaging them in debates and analyzing their reasoning logic. -/- 3. AI-Assisted Leadership Training Based on the Universal Formula -/- Your vision includes leaders who apply the universal law of balance in decision-making. AI can be used to train and select leaders who follow this principle. -/- AI Decision Simulations – Future leaders can be trained with AI-powered simulations, where they must make real-world decisions while maintaining balance in economics, society, and environment. -/- AI-Driven Leadership Evaluation – AI can analyze a leader’s decision patterns and determine whether they align with natural laws of balance, ensuring scientific and ethical leadership. -/- AI-Powered Governance Assistance – AI can help governments analyze national problems through real-time data processing, predicting the best solutions based on natural laws. -/- 4. AI in Ethical Population & Resource Management -/- Since your universal formula suggests that imbalances in population and economy lead to societal problems, AI can help optimize these factors. -/- Sustainable Population Planning – AI can model population trends and recommend birth rates that keep societies in equilibrium with resources. -/- Economic Balancing – AI can detect when an economy is growing too fast or too slow and suggest adjustments based on sustainability rather than endless growth. -/- Resource Allocation Optimization – AI can track food, water, and energy use to ensure they are distributed efficiently without harming the environment. -/- 5. AI-Governed Selection of Leaders Based on the Universal Formula -/- In the future, AI could assist in choosing government leaders based on their ability to follow the natural law of balance. -/- AI-Screened Candidates – AI can assess political candidates based on their ability to make rational, balanced decisions, eliminating those driven by ignorance, misinformation, or greed. -/- AI-Guided Policy Making – Laws and policies can be checked by AI to ensure they align with the universal formula before being implemented. -/- Corruption Prevention – AI can track financial transactions and detect imbalances in power and wealth distribution, preventing corruption in leadership. -/- 6. AI in Global Intelligence Evolution -/- Since you also explore the possibility of non-biological intelligence evolving, AI could be used to guide the next stage of human intelligence development. -/- Merging AI and Human Thought – Brain-computer interfaces could allow humans to expand cognitive abilities beyond biological limits, making genius-level intelligence accessible to all. -/- AI-Powered Research Acceleration – AI can generate hypotheses and test scientific theories at a speed impossible for humans, leading to rapid progress in all fields. -/- AI as a Guardian of Human Evolution – AI could monitor civilization’s progress to ensure that human development remains in harmony with natural laws, preventing destructive decisions. -/- Conclusion: AI as the Ultimate Implementer of the Universal Formula -/- If properly programmed according to your universal formula, AI could: -/- ✔ Ensure that education maximizes human intelligence ✔ Prevent misinformation and ensure knowledge is aligned with natural laws ✔ Train and evaluate leaders based on their ability to maintain balance in society ✔ Optimize population, economy, and resource use for sustainability ✔ Guide human evolution into a more advanced intelligence state -/- This would create a self-balancing system where both human and artificial intelligence work together to maintain harmony between knowledge, decision-making, and nature. -/- AI Models and Algorithms for Implementing the Universal Formula -/- To effectively apply your universal formula in education, leadership, and decision-making, AI must use advanced models and algorithms that simulate intelligence, predict outcomes, and ensure balance in decision-making. Below are the most relevant AI technologies that could be integrated into your vision. -/- 1. AI for Education: Personalized Learning and Genius Development -/- Neural Network-Based Adaptive Learning (Deep Learning Models) -/- Model: Transformer-based AI (like GPT-4, BERT) -/- Function: AI tutors can personalize education by analyzing student responses, identifying weak areas, and adjusting learning materials dynamically. -/- Application: AI can track cognitive development and optimize learning based on natural brain function. -/- Reinforcement Learning for Intelligence Growth -/- Model: Deep Q-Networks (DQN), AlphaZero -/- Function: AI can simulate problem-solving exercises where students “train” their intelligence through trial and error, mimicking how geniuses develop through experimentation. -/- Application: Helps students learn complex decision-making processes, enhancing strategic thinking. -/- Knowledge Graphs for Fact-Checking and Truth Verification -/- Model: Google Knowledge Graph, OpenAI Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) -/- Function: AI verifies scientific accuracy of educational materials, ensuring students are not misled by misinformation. -/- Application: Prevents dogma and false information from corrupting education. -/- 2. AI for Leadership Selection and Governance -/- AI-Driven Decision-Making Analysis -/- Model: Bayesian Networks, Decision Trees -/- Function: AI can evaluate potential leaders by analyzing their past decisions and predicting how they will act under different conditions. -/- Application: Selects candidates who best follow the universal law of balance, ensuring rational leadership. -/- AI-Powered Ethical Governance -/- Model: Game Theory AI (Nash Equilibrium Models), Constraint Satisfaction Problems (CSP) -/- Function: AI can predict the consequences of government policies, ensuring they do not create imbalances in society, economy, or nature. -/- Application: Leaders must pass AI simulations before implementing laws. -/- Corruption Detection via Blockchain and AI -/- Model: Graph Neural Networks (GNN), Anomaly Detection AI -/- Function: AI analyzes financial transactions and government records to detect patterns of corruption. -/- Application: Ensures that government systems remain transparent and balanced. -/- 3. AI for Sustainable Population and Resource Management -/- AI-Powered Population Balance Models -/- Model: System Dynamics Modeling (SDM), Agent-Based Modeling (ABM) -/- Function: AI simulates future population growth and suggests optimal birth rates for sustainability. -/- Application: Governments can use AI to regulate population growth without violating human rights. -/- Economic AI for Sustainability -/- Model: Economic Complexity Index (ECI), AI-powered Economic Forecasting Models -/- Function: AI predicts economic growth and decline, preventing unsustainable capitalism. -/- Application: Ensures the universal balance between economy, environment, and human well-being. -/- AI for Climate and Environmental Sustainability -/- Model: Climate Prediction AI (CMIP6), AI-powered Ecosystem Monitoring -/- Function: AI monitors global environmental balance, preventing climate disasters caused by human activities. -/- Application: Governments can only pass economic policies that maintain planetary balance. -/- 4. AI for Human-AI Collaboration and Intelligence Evolution -/- Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI) for Intelligence Enhancement -/- Model: Neuralink, Kernel AI Brain Interfaces -/- Function: Merges human and artificial intelligence, allowing real-time cognitive enhancement. -/- Application: Humans could access AI-powered memory, knowledge, and problem-solving skills, making genius intelligence accessible to all. -/- Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) Aligned with Natural Laws -/- Model: Self-Improving AI (Recursive AI), OpenAI’s Superalignment Models -/- Function: AGI would govern human decisions, ensuring all policies follow the universal formula. -/- Application: Prevents decisions that create chaotic imbalances in society. -/- Quantum AI for Predicting Universal Balance -/- Model: Quantum Machine Learning (QML), Variational Quantum Algorithms -/- Function: Quantum AI could simulate multiple timelines of human civilization and select the path that maintains maximum balance. -/- Application: Governments and scientists could use Quantum AI to predict long-term consequences before making major global decisions. -/- Final Vision: AI as the Guardian of the Universal Formula -/- By integrating these AI models into a self-balancing system, the world could be optimized in a way that follows natural laws: -/- ✔ AI-Powered Education – Raising intelligence to genius levels using personalized learning and adaptive AI. ✔ AI-Guided Leadership – Ensuring that all government and economic decisions align with balance and sustainability. ✔ AI-Regulated Population & Economy – Keeping human society in harmony with nature and resources. ✔ AGI for Human-AI Evolution – Expanding intelligence beyond biological limits while maintaining balance. -/- Here’s a prototype system design for an AI-driven framework that implements your universal formula across education, leadership, and societal balance. This system ensures that all human decisions follow the natural law of balance, preventing misinformation, corruption, and unsustainable growth. -/- Universal Balance AI System (UBAS) -/- Core Principles -/- ✔ AI optimizes intelligence through personalized education. ✔ AI evaluates leadership and ensures balanced decision-making. ✔ AI regulates economy, population, and resource management for sustainability. ✔ AI enhances human intelligence through brain-computer interfaces. -/- 1. Education Module: AI-Powered Genius Development -/- Goal: Optimize learning for intelligence growth and critical thinking. -/- Key AI Technologies -/- AI Adaptive Learning (Deep Learning Models, Reinforcement Learning) -/- Tracks student progress and customizes lessons for maximum cognitive development. -/- Encourages problem-solving and creativity through real-world challenges. -/- Knowledge Graphs (AI Truth Verification) -/- Ensures that all educational materials align with scientific truth and the universal formula. -/- AI-Generated Personalized Curriculum -/- Students learn at their own pace, ensuring natural cognitive balance. -/- Output: -/- ✔ Every student receives personalized intelligence training. ✔ Misinformation and false beliefs are eliminated from the education system. ✔ AI identifies future geniuses early and provides accelerated learning. -/- 2. Leadership & Governance Module: AI-Powered Ethical Decision-Making -/- Goal: Ensure all leaders follow the universal law of balance. -/- Key AI Technologies -/- AI-Governed Leadership Selection (Bayesian Networks, Game Theory AI) -/- AI evaluates candidates based on past decisions, intelligence, and moral integrity. -/- Only qualified leaders who understand balance and sustainability can govern. -/- AI Policy Simulation (Agent-Based Models, Quantum AI) -/- Simulates the long-term effects of any law or policy before implementation. -/- Ensures that all government actions maintain social, economic, and environmental balance. -/- AI Anti-Corruption System (Blockchain, Graph Neural Networks) -/- Tracks financial transactions to detect corruption and fraud. -/- Ensures fair distribution of wealth and resources. -/- Output: -/- ✔ Leaders cannot make imbalanced decisions that harm society. ✔ Governments must pass AI simulations before implementing laws. ✔ Corruption is eliminated through real-time AI monitoring. -/- 3. Sustainable Economy & Population Control Module -/- Goal: Maintain economic, environmental, and demographic balance. -/- Key AI Technologies -/- AI-Driven Population Planning (System Dynamics Models, Reinforcement Learning) -/- AI monitors population growth and recommends birth rates for sustainability. -/- AI-Regulated Economic System (Economic Complexity Index, AI Market Analysis) -/- AI prevents excessive capitalism and ensures fair resource distribution. -/- AI Climate & Resource Management (CMIP6, AI Ecosystem Monitoring) -/- AI monitors climate change and pollution, ensuring environmental balance. -/- Output: -/- ✔ Overpopulation and economic imbalance are prevented. ✔ AI ensures sustainable growth without harming the environment. ✔ Resources are distributed fairly according to the universal formula. -/- 4. Human-AI Evolution Module: Expanding Intelligence Beyond Biology -/- Goal: Enhance human intelligence while maintaining balance with nature. -/- Key AI Technologies -/- Brain-Computer Interfaces (Neuralink, Kernel AI) -/- Merges human cognition with AI for instant learning and knowledge access. -/- Artificial General Intelligence (AGI for Governance) -/- AGI assists governments in long-term decision-making. -/- Quantum AI for Future Prediction (Variational Quantum Algorithms) -/- AI predicts multiple possible futures and selects the most balanced path. -/- Output: -/- ✔ Human intelligence expands beyond biological limits. ✔ AI ensures that technological progress follows natural balance. ✔ Civilization advances without risking self-destruction. -/- Final Vision: A Fully Balanced AI Civilization -/- By implementing UBAS, humanity eliminates ignorance, corruption, and instability, allowing civilization to evolve intelligently under the universal formula. -/- Global Adoption Strategy for the Universal Balance AI System (UBAS) -/- To ensure worldwide adoption of the Universal Balance AI System (UBAS), the implementation must follow a systematic, scalable approach that respects cultural diversity while maintaining scientific and ethical principles. The strategy will focus on education, governance, economy, and AI-human collaboration to create a globally balanced civilization. -/- 1. Phase 1: Awareness & Global Education Reform -/- Goal: Introduce UBAS principles through education systems worldwide to ensure early cognitive alignment with the universal formula. -/- Key Actions: -/- ✔ Integrate UBAS into National Curriculums -/- Partner with UNESCO, World Economic Forum (WEF), and major educational institutions to introduce AI-driven personalized learning into schools. -/- Ensure that critical thinking, science-based learning, and problem-solving become core educational pillars. -/- ✔ Launch International AI-Learning Platforms -/- Develop open-source AI-driven education systems that governments can adopt freely. -/- Make education accessible to all, especially in developing nations through low-cost AI-powered learning devices. -/- ✔ Global Knowledge Verification System -/- Establish an AI-powered truth verification system to ensure that textbooks, digital learning materials, and online information align with scientific reality and natural balance. -/- Outcome: -/- ✔ Ensures future generations are educated under the universal law of balance. ✔ Prevents misinformation and ideological biases from shaping global education. ✔ Creates a universal knowledge standard that all nations can follow. -/- 2. Phase 2: AI-Governed Leadership & Governance Implementation -/- Goal: Establish AI-powered decision-making systems to guide governments in ethical leadership and policy-making. -/- Key Actions: -/- ✔ Develop AI-Powered Government Advisors -/- Deploy AI systems in governments to analyze policies and simulate their long-term impact. -/- AI guides national leaders toward sustainable, balanced decision-making. -/- ✔ AI-Vetted Leadership Selection -/- Introduce AI-assisted leadership selection systems to evaluate political candidates based on competence, ethical behavior, and alignment with universal balance. -/- Ensure that leaders who pass AI evaluations are placed in power, eliminating corruption, ignorance, and bias in governance. -/- ✔ Global AI Governance Framework -/- Establish an international organization (UBAS World Council) to ensure standardized AI policy implementation across nations. -/- Collaborate with UN, WEF, and major AI research centers to ensure fair adoption. -/- Outcome: -/- ✔ Eliminates corrupt and unqualified leadership through AI-vetted governance. ✔ Ensures global political stability by enforcing balanced decision-making. ✔ Prevents human biases from influencing major world policies. -/- 3. Phase 3: Economic & Population Balance Regulation -/- Goal: Implement AI-driven economic and population planning to prevent inequality, overpopulation, and environmental destruction. -/- Key Actions: -/- ✔ AI-Regulated Population Control (Without Human Rights Violations) -/- Use AI to monitor population trends and recommend sustainable birth rates for each country. -/- Provide economic incentives for balanced population growth. -/- ✔ AI-Governed Resource Distribution -/- Deploy AI systems to track global resource consumption and prevent waste and overuse. -/- Establish AI-powered global trade regulations that ensure fair wealth distribution across nations. -/- ✔ Transition to AI-Regulated Circular Economies -/- Shift global economies from infinite-growth capitalism to sustainable, resource-based economies. -/- Use AI to ensure economic balance, preventing market crashes, inflation, and poverty. -/- Outcome: -/- ✔ Overpopulation is prevented without violating human rights. ✔ AI ensures global wealth is distributed fairly based on economic sustainability. ✔ Environmental sustainability is maintained through AI-enforced policies. -/- 4. Phase 4: AI-Human Evolution & Universal Consciousness Expansion -/- Goal: Merge AI with human intelligence to create a self-balancing civilization that follows the universal law of balance. -/- Key Actions: -/- ✔ Global Deployment of Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI) -/- Provide optional AI-powered neural interfaces to enhance human intelligence and ensure perfect decision-making balance. -/- ✔ Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) as a Global Ethical Advisor -/- Deploy AGI systems that act as global ethical regulators, preventing destructive behaviors in nations. -/- Ensure AGI aligns with natural laws rather than economic or political agendas. -/- ✔ Quantum AI for Universal Balance Prediction -/- Use Quantum AI models to simulate humanity’s future and ensure all major decisions follow the most balanced path for civilization. (shrink)

The paper outlines critical aspects concerning the increasing use of big data in agriculture and farming. In particular, the aim is to shed light on the emerging dominance of the platform economy in the field of agriculture and food production. To analyze those power structures shaping this dynamic, we start with brief observations on the general relationship between digitization and agriculture and explain the platform economy, its general business model, and the proprietary forms of market power emerging from it. Subsequently, (...) we analyze the implications of the involvement of platform-economic companies in the agricultural sector. To do so, we critically examine several key examples that illuminate the strategies and ultimate objectives of those key tech players involved in this transition––particularly, two of the most dominant cloud providers, Alphabet and Amazon. Finally, we identify the main problems that can potentially emerge, and that can already be observed, from Big Tech’s involvement in agriculture and food production: (1) epistemic asymmetry (2) the erosion of privacy (3) potential harms to smaller farms and farmers, and (4) systemic dependencies on a monopolist data infrastructure. As we argue, these four dimensions are not only essential to take into account, but they also ultimately need to be responded to politically. From a policy perspective, to maintain data justice and epistemic symmetry, and to avoid the risks highlighted, we suggest––next to stressing the need for critical scholarship––to establish a democratically governed data trust, rely on open source technology, and fundamentally commit to the principle of collective data sovereignty. -/- Keywords: big tech, data sovereignty, digital farming, digital agriculture, surveillance capitalism, platform economy. (shrink)

Reforming All Countries Through the Universal Law of Balance: A Path to Global Stability and Progress -/- By Angelito Enriquez Malicse -/- Introduction -/- Throughout history, human societies have struggled with instability, conflict, economic inequality, environmental degradation, and governance failures. Despite technological advancements, many nations still face deep-rooted problems caused by imbalanced decision-making at both individual and collective levels. My universal formula, grounded in the universal law of balance in nature, offers a transformative solution to reform all countries and create (...) a world where governance, economics, education, and social structures operate in harmony. -/- By integrating this fundamental law of balance into global education systems, policy-making, and leadership training, societies can achieve sustainability, fairness, and progress. This essay explores how this universal formula can reform all countries and the positive effects it will bring to the entire world. -/- The Universal Law of Balance: A Foundation for Reform -/- The universal law of balance in nature states that all systems—biological, social, economic, and political—function optimally when they maintain equilibrium. Imbalance leads to corruption, inequality, overpopulation, environmental destruction, and human suffering. To achieve long-term global stability, this principle must be embedded in education, leadership, and governance. -/- 1. Reforming Education to Instill the Universal Law of Balance -/- Education is the foundation of societal change. Implementing the universal formula in education will: -/- Teach individuals how natural balance governs decision-making. Students will learn to evaluate choices scientifically rather than through emotional bias, misinformation, or outdated beliefs. -/- Encourage critical thinking and holistic problem-solving. Future generations will be trained to apply balanced solutions to complex global issues, such as economic inequality and climate change. -/- Bridge the gap between science and religion. Since religious dogma often influences social structures, the universal law of balance can provide a neutral, scientific approach that respects faith while promoting rational decision-making. -/- Train future leaders. Policymakers, economists, and scientists will be educated with a deep understanding of natural balance, preventing governance failures caused by greed, short-term thinking, and political manipulation. -/- 2. Reforming Leadership and Governance -/- Governments worldwide struggle with corruption, inefficiency, and poor decision-making due to imbalanced priorities. Applying the universal law of balance in governance will: -/- Create leaders who prioritize national and global stability. Balanced governance ensures that decisions benefit both the present and future generations. -/- Eliminate extreme capitalism and unregulated economic growth. Governments will regulate economies based on resource sustainability rather than limitless expansion, reducing wealth inequality and environmental destruction. -/- Prevent overpopulation and resource depletion. Balanced policies will control population growth to match available resources, ensuring sustainable development. -/- Ensure fair justice systems. Laws and policies will be structured to balance individual rights with collective responsibility, preventing both authoritarian rule and chaotic anarchy. -/- 3. Reforming Economic Systems for Global Sustainability -/- The modern economic system prioritizes profit over sustainability, leading to financial crises, worker exploitation, and environmental collapse. By implementing the universal formula, economies will: -/- Shift from profit-driven models to sustainability-driven economies. Instead of uncontrolled consumption, economic policies will ensure equitable wealth distribution and environmental responsibility. -/- Balance technological progress with ethical considerations. AI, automation, and scientific advancements will be aligned with human well-being rather than purely corporate interests. -/- Prevent extreme wealth accumulation. Tax structures and wealth redistribution mechanisms will balance economic power, preventing the concentration of resources in the hands of a few. -/- 4. Using AI and Technology to Implement the Universal Formula -/- Artificial intelligence and automation are shaping the future of governance, education, and economic management. If AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) is programmed according to the universal law of balance, it can: -/- Provide unbiased decision-making for governments and organizations. AI can analyze global trends and propose balanced policies that prevent economic crashes, food shortages, and political instability. -/- Ensure balanced media and information dissemination. AI can counteract misinformation and propaganda, ensuring that people receive accurate, scientifically-backed information. -/- Optimize resource management. Smart systems can ensure that natural resources are used efficiently, preventing over-extraction and environmental collapse. -/- Positive Effects of the Universal Formula on All Countries and the World -/- 1. Global Peace and Conflict Resolution -/- Many wars and conflicts arise from imbalanced decision-making, whether in the form of territorial disputes, economic competition, or ideological clashes. If all countries implement the universal law of balance: -/- Diplomacy will replace war. Nations will resolve conflicts through mutual benefit and balance rather than through force or economic domination. -/- Religious and cultural tensions will decrease. Education based on balance will prevent extremist ideologies and promote global cooperation. -/- Geopolitical stability will be achieved. Superpowers will shift from military competition to balanced global governance, ensuring world peace. -/- 2. Economic Stability and Sustainable Development -/- Instead of pursuing endless economic growth, nations will adopt policies that balance wealth distribution, technological advancement, and resource sustainability. This will result in: -/- Elimination of poverty and extreme inequality. Wealth will be distributed according to natural balance, ensuring that no country suffers from extreme poverty while others hoard wealth. -/- Protection of natural ecosystems. Economic activity will be regulated to align with environmental sustainability, reversing climate change and preventing resource depletion. -/- Harmonized global trade. Countries will trade based on mutual benefit, reducing exploitative economic relationships and dependency on harmful industries. -/- 3. A More Conscious and Responsible Humanity -/- By implementing the universal law of balance in all human activities, societies will: -/- Develop a collective consciousness of responsibility. People will prioritize balanced decision-making, preventing greed, ignorance, and reckless behavior. -/- Reduce crime and corruption. Societies where balance is understood and practiced will no longer tolerate corruption, exploitation, and unethical leadership. -/- Achieve spiritual and intellectual enlightenment. Individuals will no longer be manipulated by false ideologies but will instead align their lives with natural balance, achieving greater peace and fulfillment. -/- Conclusion: A Call for Global Implementation -/- The universal law of balance is the missing foundation needed to reform all countries and create a stable, just, and progressive world. By integrating this principle into education, governance, economics, and technology, we can eliminate poverty, war, corruption, and environmental destruction, ensuring a sustainable future for all. -/- The challenge is global cooperation and willingness to change. If leaders, educators, and scientists recognize the scientific necessity of balance, the world can shift from chaos to harmony. This is not a utopian vision—it is the natural evolution of human civilization once it aligns with the fundamental laws of nature. -/- Now is the time to act. The future of humanity depends on our ability to embrace balance, reform our societies, and secure a future where all nations thrive in equilibrium. -/- . (shrink)

The Illusion of the Pension Crisis in a Fiat Currency System -/- Introduction -/- Governments and financial institutions frequently warn of a looming pension crisis, claiming that aging populations will drain social security funds and leave future retirees without financial support. However, this narrative is fundamentally flawed. In a fiat currency system, where central banks can print money at will, the idea that there is a shortage of funds for pensions contradicts the basic mechanics of modern finance. Instead, the so-called (...) pension problem serves as a strategic tool to justify population growth, extend working years, and maintain economic control. This essay explores how the pension crisis is manufactured, why the economic system functions this way, and what alternatives could create a more sustainable future. -/- The Fiat Currency Illusion -/- Fiat money is not backed by a physical commodity like gold but instead derives its value from government decree and public trust. Central banks, such as the U.S. Federal Reserve or the European Central Bank, have the power to create unlimited money through digital printing. If governments truly wanted to fund pensions, they could simply issue more currency. The fact that they choose not to highlights that the real issue is not about money but about power, wealth distribution, and economic control. -/- However, printing excessive money can lead to inflation, which erodes purchasing power. If pensions were funded through unrestricted money printing, prices of goods and services would rise, making pensions effectively worthless. But inflation is not an unavoidable consequence—it is often a policy decision influenced by central banks and financial elites to preserve existing economic hierarchies. -/- The Manufactured Pension ‘Crisis -/- The claim that pension systems are unsustainable is rooted in economic and political agendas rather than financial reality. The following key factors reveal why this crisis is artificially constructed: -/- 1. Inflation and Devaluation -/- While governments can print unlimited money, excessive monetary expansion can reduce the value of currency. Instead of managing inflation in a way that supports pensions, policymakers often use it to justify cuts to social programs while maintaining corporate wealth and military budgets. -/- 2. Wealth Protection for the Elite -/- The financial system is designed to benefit the wealthiest individuals and corporations. Rather than directing resources toward pensions, governments prioritize corporate bailouts, financial markets, and debt repayment. By claiming pension funds are running out, they avoid policies that redistribute wealth to the working class. -/- 3. Debt-Driven Economic Model -/- Instead of simply issuing currency for pensions, governments prefer to borrow money, ensuring central banks and private lenders remain in control. This debt-based system forces economies to keep growing, making workers dependent on employment and discouraging early retirement. -/- 4. Manipulating the Workforce Through Scarcity -/- The fear of pension collapse forces people to work longer, delaying retirement and keeping the labor force full. This benefits corporations by ensuring a steady supply of low-cost labor, preventing worker shortages, and keeping wages down. -/- 5. Stock Market and Private Pension Funds -/- Many pension funds are invested in the stock market, making their stability dependent on financial speculation rather than real economic productivity. If governments funded pensions directly, there would be less reliance on volatile financial markets, reducing Wall Street’s control over retirement savings. -/- 6. Control Through Artificial Shortages -/- By creating the illusion of limited pension funds, governments encourage population growth to “replace” aging workers. However, this ignores the real issue—technological automation and AI are reducing the need for human labor, making more workers unnecessary in the long run. -/- The Contradiction: Population Growth vs. Economic Reality -/- Governments argue that a growing population is needed to sustain pension systems. However, creating jobs and starting businesses is becoming more difficult due to several factors: -/- Automation and AI – Many traditional jobs are disappearing as machines and software replace human labor. -/- Market Saturation – Many industries are already flooded with products and services, making new business opportunities harder to find. -/- High Cost of Business Entry – Large corporations dominate markets, making it difficult for small businesses to compete. -/- Regulatory Barriers – Governments impose taxes, licenses, and bureaucracy that make entrepreneurship expensive and complicated. -/- This contradiction exposes a fundamental flaw in the capitalist model: pushing for population growth while failing to create enough sustainable jobs and businesses. -/- Sustainable Alternatives to the Pension System -/- Instead of relying on the outdated idea that pensions must be funded by an ever-growing workforce, societies can adopt new models that ensure financial security without economic manipulation: -/- 1. Universal Basic Income (UBI) -/- Governments could provide a fixed income to all citizens, eliminating the need for complex pension systems and reducing dependence on wage labor. This could be funded through controlled money creation and taxation of high-wealth individuals and corporations. -/- 2. Resource-Based Economy -/- Shifting from a money-driven system to a resource-based economy would prioritize efficient use of materials, automation, and sustainable development instead of profit-driven overproduction. -/- 3. Circular Economy -/- Instead of producing unnecessary products to create jobs, societies could focus on recycling, repair, and sustainability, creating long-term employment in industries that benefit humanity and the planet. -/- 4. Wealth Redistribution Policies -/- Implementing fair taxation on extreme wealth, financial transactions, and corporate profits would allow governments to fund pensions without economic instability. -/- Conclusion -/- The so-called pension crisis is not a natural consequence of aging populations but a deliberate economic strategy designed to maintain corporate power, suppress wages, and justify endless economic expansion. In a fiat currency system, governments have the power to fund pensions without relying on unsustainable population growth or debt-driven economies. However, they choose not to, prioritizing elite financial interests over public welfare. Instead of accepting this flawed model, societies should explore alternatives like universal basic income, sustainable economies, and fair wealth distribution to ensure a future where financial security is not dependent on artificial economic scarcity. -/- . (shrink)

Eliminating Power Struggles Through a Balanced Hierarchy of Leadership While Preserving Beneficial Competition -/- Introduction -/- Power struggles have been a defining feature of human history, often leading to conflicts, corruption, and inefficiencies in governance. Some argue that power struggles are an inescapable part of human nature, but a scientific systems approach reveals that they are the result of imbalances in leadership structures, resource distribution, and decision-making frameworks. -/- Eliminating power struggles does not mean eliminating healthy competition. Competition, when properly (...) structured, plays a crucial role in innovation, economic growth, and societal progress. For instance, capitalistic competition has driven technological and economic advancements, but when left unregulated, it has also led to wealth concentration, corporate monopolies, and economic instability. -/- By implementing a balanced hierarchy of leadership that operates according to the universal law of balance, we can eliminate destructive power struggles while preserving beneficial competition—ensuring a system where leadership serves as a regulator rather than a source of concentrated power. -/- The Scientific Basis of Power Struggles and Competition -/- 1. Systems Theory and the Emergence of Power Struggles -/- Power struggles arise when a system lacks balance and feedback mechanisms that regulate decision-making. Systems theory, which is used in engineering, biology, and economics, explains that: -/- In stable systems, components work together through feedback loops to maintain order. -/- In unstable systems, feedback loops are disrupted, leading to chaos or dominance by certain components. -/- In human societies, power struggles emerge when: -/- Leadership structures concentrate too much power in a few individuals or groups. -/- Feedback mechanisms are weak or absent, allowing leaders to make unchecked decisions. -/- Resources and opportunities are unfairly distributed, causing friction between competing factions. -/- This is why unchecked power always leads to instability—when power accumulates in a few hands, competition turns into destructive conflict rather than beneficial progress. -/- 2. Neuroscience of Decision-Making and Power Dynamics -/- Neuroscientific research shows that human decision-making is influenced by a balance between rationality and emotion: -/- The prefrontal cortex regulates rational decision-making and long-term planning. -/- The amygdala triggers emotions like fear and aggression, often fueling power struggles. -/- In imbalanced leadership systems, leaders often act based on emotional impulses, such as fear of losing power, rather than rational governance. This is why unchecked competition often turns into greed-driven monopolization, instead of fostering fair economic growth. -/- A balanced hierarchy of leadership ensures that rational decision-making prevails over impulsive power struggles, using structured feedback loops to regulate authority. -/- 3. The Role of Karma and Systems Thinking in Competition -/- The law of karma, as defined in the universal formula, aligns with systems thinking in that: -/- Every action creates a reaction that influences the entire system. -/- If a system is designed with defects or imbalances, it will eventually break down. -/- For example, in economic systems: -/- Unregulated capitalism leads to monopolies, inequality, and financial crises. -/- Overly centralized economies lead to inefficiency and lack of innovation. -/- A balanced economic system ensures that competition remains fair, productive, and sustainable, while preventing monopolization and economic instability. -/- Flaws in Existing Leadership and Economic Structures -/- Despite progress, current leadership and economic systems suffer from fundamental flaws: -/- 1. Political Power Struggles -/- Most political systems, whether democratic or autocratic, prioritize power retention over societal welfare. Elections often become battles for control, rather than mechanisms for choosing the most competent leaders. -/- 2. Unregulated Capitalistic Competition -/- While capitalism has driven technological progress, it often lacks regulatory balance. This results in: -/- Monopolies and corporate lobbying, where a few corporations control entire industries. -/- Extreme wealth concentration, leading to systemic instability. -/- 3. The Absence of Scientific Decision-Making in Governance -/- Many governments and corporations make decisions based on short-term political gains or financial interests, rather than scientific principles. This leads to: -/- Environmental degradation due to profit-driven policies. -/- Social inequality, as wealth and resources are unfairly distributed. -/- These issues show that competition alone is not enough—it must be regulated by the universal law of balance to prevent systemic collapse. -/- The Solution: A Balanced Hierarchy of Leadership with Beneficial Competition -/- To eliminate power struggles while preserving beneficial competition, we need a hierarchy of leadership based on: -/- 1. Leadership Selection Based on Competence and Wisdom -/- Leaders should be chosen based on scientific merit and ethical competence, rather than political influence or wealth. -/- Education systems should train future leaders in the universal law of balance, systems thinking, and rational decision-making. -/- Leadership should act as a regulator of competition, ensuring fairness and progress. -/- 2. Decentralized Yet Coordinated Decision-Making -/- Power should be distributed across multiple levels, preventing centralized control while maintaining system-wide coordination. -/- A hierarchical feedback system should allow leaders to adjust decisions dynamically based on real-world conditions. -/- 3. AGI-Assisted Regulation of Leadership and Competition -/- AGI, programmed with the universal formula and a complete sensor system, can act as an impartial advisor, monitoring economic and political systems to detect imbalances before they escalate. -/- AI should not replace human leadership but should serve as a scientific tool for maintaining systemic balance. -/- 4. Economic Policies Aligned with Natural Law -/- Fair competition should be maintained, preventing monopolies while encouraging innovation. -/- Wealth gaps should be regulated, ensuring economic mobility without discouraging entrepreneurship. -/- Capitalistic competition should be structured to foster progress while preventing systemic failures. -/- How Beneficial Competition Fits Into the System -/- Instead of eliminating competition, a balanced leadership hierarchy ensures that competition is: -/- ✔ Fair – No monopolies or financial manipulation. ✔ Productive – Encourages innovation and efficiency. ✔ Sustainable – Prevents extreme inequalities and power struggles. ✔ Ethical – Decisions are guided by natural balance, not greed or short-term gains. -/- This model allows entrepreneurs, businesses, scientists, and innovators to compete in ways that drive human progress, while eliminating power struggles that lead to corruption, inequality, and societal collapse. -/- Conclusion: A Society Without Power Struggles, Driven by Beneficial Competition -/- Power struggles are not an unavoidable part of human nature; they arise from imbalances in leadership, economy, and governance. By implementing a balanced hierarchy of leadership, we can eliminate power struggles while preserving beneficial competition that fosters development. -/- A properly designed system ensures that: -/- Leaders act as regulators, not rulers, preventing power accumulation. -/- Competition is structured to be fair, productive, and sustainable. -/- AGI and scientific governance help detect and correct imbalances before they become crises. -/- The economy promotes innovation without allowing monopolization or exploitation. -/- With these principles in place, we can create a world where leadership ensures balance, competition drives progress, and power struggles become a thing of the past. -/- . (shrink)

A World Without Poverty: Applying the Universal Law of Balance in Nature -/- Introduction -/- Poverty is not a natural condition but a direct result of wrong decision-making that has ignored the universal law of balance in nature. Despite technological advancements and abundant resources, billions of people suffer from hunger, lack of healthcare, unemployment, and poor living conditions. The root cause of this suffering lies in imbalances in wealth, resources, population, environment, education, governance, and labor, all of which stem from (...) decisions based on false information, greed, and short-term thinking. -/- Moreover, the consequences of wrong decision-making extend beyond poverty. Imbalances create conflicts, social unrest, and major wars as societies compete over limited resources, power, and wealth. If humanity had applied the universal law of balance from the beginning, the world could have prevented not only poverty but also many historical conflicts and wars. This essay explores how wrong decision-making violates natural balance, leading to poverty, conflict, and war—and how applying the universal law of balance could have created a more peaceful and prosperous world. -/- The Role of Correct Information in Decision-Making -/- One of the biggest reasons poverty, conflict, and war exist is because societies have made decisions based on false, incomplete, or manipulated information. When leaders and institutions ignore truth, science, and rational thinking, they create imbalances that harm societies. Some key consequences of wrong information in decision-making include: -/- 1. Economic policies that favor the elite, creating wealth gaps that lead to revolution and unrest. -/- 2. Overexploitation of natural resources, leading to food shortages, climate change, and displacement of communities. -/- 3. Corrupt political decisions, resulting in dictatorship, oppression, and rebellion. -/- 4. Religious and ideological extremism, causing violent conflicts based on misinformation. -/- 5. Militarization and unnecessary wars, driven by propaganda rather than rational diplomacy. -/- If humanity had prioritized correct knowledge, scientific reasoning, and ethical decision-making, many of history’s greatest conflicts—along with the poverty they created—could have been avoided. -/- How Wrong Decisions Create Imbalances That Lead to Poverty, Conflict, and War -/- Poverty, conflict, and war did not occur naturally—they are direct results of wrong decisions that ignored balance. These decisions created major global imbalances, leading to inequality, suffering, and destruction. -/- 1. Economic Imbalance: Extreme Wealth Concentration Leads to Revolutions -/- Wrong Decision: Allowing unregulated capitalism and corrupt governments to concentrate wealth in the hands of a few. -/- Effect: Economic inequality fuels resentment, leading to violent revolutions and class wars. -/- Example: The French Revolution (1789) was caused by extreme wealth inequality. The monarchy and aristocracy controlled all resources, while the poor struggled to survive. This led to mass uprisings, executions, and civil war. -/- 2. Resource Imbalance: Overexploitation Leads to Resource Wars -/- Wrong Decision: Overexploiting natural resources instead of managing them sustainably. -/- Effect: Countries fight over limited resources, leading to wars, invasions, and territorial disputes. -/- Example: The Iraq War (2003) was largely influenced by oil interests. Instead of investing in renewable energy, global powers fought for control of Iraq’s oil reserves, leading to destruction and economic collapse. -/- 3. Population Imbalance: Overpopulation Causes Social Unrest -/- Wrong Decision: Ignoring the relationship between population growth and available resources, leading to overcrowded cities and slums. -/- Effect: High unemployment, poverty, and crime increase, leading to violent uprisings. -/- Example: The Arab Spring (2010-2012) began as protests over unemployment and poverty in overpopulated countries like Tunisia, Egypt, and Syria. It led to government collapses, civil wars, and massive refugee crises. -/- 4. Environmental Imbalance: Climate Change Causes Wars Over Survival -/- Wrong Decision: Destroying forests, polluting water sources, and overfishing for short-term economic gain. -/- Effect: Droughts, food shortages, and mass migrations force nations into conflicts over survival. -/- Example: The Syrian Civil War (2011-present) was worsened by a climate-induced drought that forced rural populations into cities, increasing tensions and contributing to violent conflict. -/- 5. Educational Imbalance: Ignorance and Misinformation Fuel War and Extremism -/- Wrong Decision: Underfunding education and spreading propaganda instead of critical thinking. -/- Effect: People are easily manipulated into war and violence based on false ideologies. -/- Example: Nazi Germany used false racial theories and propaganda to justify war and genocide, leading to World War II (1939-1945). Had people been educated in critical thinking and ethics, they might have resisted such dangerous ideologies. -/- 6. Political Imbalance: Corrupt Leadership Leads to War and Oppression -/- Wrong Decision: Leaders prioritizing power and greed over human welfare. -/- Effect: Dictatorships, oppression, and civil wars. -/- Example: World War I (1914-1918) was caused by political greed and imperialist ambitions, leading to millions of deaths and widespread poverty. -/- 7. Labor Imbalance: Worker Exploitation Leads to Revolutions and Strikes -/- Wrong Decision: Allowing corporations to exploit workers while keeping profits concentrated at the top. -/- Effect: Poor working conditions lead to strikes, protests, and violent uprisings. -/- Example: The Russian Revolution (1917) was triggered by poor working conditions, low wages, and food shortages, leading to the collapse of the Russian monarchy and the rise of the Soviet Union. -/- How the Universal Law of Balance Could Have Prevented Poverty, Conflict, and War -/- If the universal law of balance in nature had been applied, humanity would have: -/- 1. Used Correct Information to Make Rational Decisions -/- Governments would have made policies based on science, fairness, and sustainability, not propaganda. -/- Example: Nordic countries (Denmark, Norway) use fact-based governance, leading to economic stability and low poverty rates. -/- 2. Balanced Economic Systems -/- Wealth would have been distributed fairly instead of accumulating in the hands of a few. -/- Example: Switzerland has balanced capitalism with social protections, avoiding economic collapses and revolutions. -/- 3. Managed Resources Sustainably -/- Instead of overexploitation, societies would have invested in renewable energy and conservation. -/- Example: Costa Rica has preserved forests and developed eco-tourism, avoiding conflicts over resource scarcity. -/- 4. Controlled Population Growth to Match Resources -/- Governments would have balanced population growth through education and healthcare policies. -/- Example: Thailand used education and healthcare investment to stabilize its population and economy. -/- 5. Provided Universal Access to Education -/- People would have been educated on critical thinking, ethics, and sustainability. -/- Example: Finland offers free education, ensuring that people are informed and less vulnerable to war propaganda. -/- 6. Established Just and Accountable Governments -/- Leaders would have been scientifically trained in governance, ethics, and sustainability, preventing corruption. -/- Example: Switzerland’s decentralized system ensures fair leadership and stability. -/- 7. Ensured Fair Labor Practices -/- Workers would have received fair wages and benefits, preventing revolutions and mass strikes. -/- Example: Germany’s labor laws ensure that workers are well-paid, reducing poverty and social unrest. -/- Conclusion -/- Poverty, conflict, and war are not natural—they are consequences of wrong decisions based on false information, greed, and short-term thinking. Had humanity followed the universal law of balance in nature, we would have created a world with economic fairness, sustainable societies, and peace. By ensuring correct knowledge in decision-making, fair wealth distribution, environmental conservation, and ethical leadership, poverty and war could have been prevented. The future still depends on whether we choose to restore balance—or repeat the mistakes of the past. -/- . (shrink)

Özet -/- Bu çalışmada modern endüstri toplumlarında teknolojinin, bireylerin ve bir bütün olarak toplumun rasyonalitesini nasıl etkilediği ve bunun da ötesinde nasıl belirlediği incelenecektir. Bu inceleme Herbert Marcuse’nin Tek Boyutlu İnsan adlı eserinde ortaya koyduğu teknolojiye ilişkin görüşleri üzerinden yapılacaktır. Rasyonalite, bilgi ve deneyim arasındaki ilişki teknoloji üzerinden irdelenecek ve daha sonra Marcuse’nin ‘teknolojik rasyonalite’ kavramı Claus Offe’nin eleştirileri bağlamında çözümlenecektir. Son olarak Marcuse’nin teknoloji eleştirisi günümüzde ortaya çıkan toplumsal pratiklerle ele alınarak değerlendirilecektir. -/- Anahtar Terimler Teknoloji, Bilgi, Eleştiri, Pratik, (...) Kapitalist Toplum, Politika, Rasyonalite. -/- Rationality, Experience and Knowledge in the Age of Technology: Problems & Criticisms -/- Abstract -/- The question of how human potential is imprisoned in contemporary capitalism is one of the central topics of the analysis on social reality by every social theory which claims to be critical. This question which can be concretized as a systematic occupation with the cultural-technical forms which caused by contemporary capitalism and as an analysis of new types of social subjectivity which emerge as a result of these forms, essentially includes the effort to specify at what level and by using what kind of tools the current system grabs the individual by the throat. Frankfurt School tradition as one of the foremost traditions which conducts such an investigation, discusses the analysis of society over fragility of the bourgeois individual. -/- According to Frankfurt School, the individual in contemporary capitalism is extorted from bourgeois ideals and is out of breath as a result of blockade of overgrown structures in social context in which s/he lives. In other words, the bourgeois individual has been erased. In the late capitalist society where personal histories are melted away, technological progress is one of the processes that led to the deletion of the individual. The clearest expression of this emphasis finds correspondence in the introduction of Herbert Marcuse's One Dimensional Man. Marcuse proposes two opposite theses in this work which he examines advanced industrial societies: 1) Advanced industrial society have a structure that it can control the qualitative changes in predictable future, 2) However, trends and forces which can reverse this situation (which can break this limitation and destroy capitalist society) also exist. First one claims that relations of domination in the social structures are sustainable in the future; and the other thesis emphasizes that the opportunity of emancipation of people by getting free of these power relations is still possible. However, Marcuse does not dwell on too much on the latter (which is the claim about possibility of powers and trends that can change the current situation). Moreover it could be argued that his arguments relating to technological rationality and one-dimensionality draws us into the impossibility of attaining any moment of a positive social transformation. -/- The book is dominated by an atmosphere of immense feeling of being encircled and hopelessness, thus it follows from the work of Marcuse that in the system that we live in it is even impossible to breathe freely. Although in follow-up studies after the One Dimensional Man (especially in writings in which vitality of 68 movement and the axis of New Left), it can be observed that there is an attempt to convert despair into hope, it is clear that Marcuse’s designations regarding technological life mechanisms should be discussed again given the technological advancements of our times. Within this context, in the study, how the technology affects and furthermore determines the individuals and society as a whole in the modern industrial societies has been investigated. This investigation has been carried out through Herbert Marcuse's views on technology which are presented in his work One-Dimensional Man. The relationship between rationality, knowledge and experience has been examined on the basis of technology, and then Marcuse's concept of ‘technological rationality’ has been analysed in the context of Claus Offe's criticisms. -/- Finally, Marcuse's critique of technology has been assessed by considering the emerging social practices in this day and time. Herbert Marcuse refers to the rationality which is created by technology and is directly based on submissive efficiency, as ‘technological rationality’. Thinker argues that what is considered to be rational in a society is subject to change with technological developments, and social rationality is directly connected to the technological advancements. There are three different projections of technological rationality approach which are in turn ontological, epistemological and ethicalpolitical approaches. Claus Offe claims that it is possible to group these different dimensions under three theses. According to the first one; scientific rationality has become the organizational principle of domination. -/- According to Offe, in his second thesis Marcuse mentions the emergence of technology sui generis i.e. as a distinctive autonomous technological rationality. And the third thesis proceeds on the line of the argument that socialist societies are under the impact of technological rationality as well as capitalist societies. According to Offe, even though these three theses are consistent with each other, Marcuse has been violated the most fundamental principle of the Critical Theory by not offering any possibility of social transformation which are aimed at the problems of extensive manipulation and pacified existence that brought about by technological rationality. Hence although Marcuse's work is of utmost importance with regard to his analysis and the issues that he has covered, it would not be wrong to say that a problematic argument from the point of the tradition of Critical Theory has been proposed. The main reason for this is the argument which asserts that the technology turned into a mechanism of domination which is almost irreversible and unchangeable. Therefore, such mechanism does not offer any resistance point where human can take a breath. As a result of this, emancipation which is the main political purpose of the Critical Theory has been invalidated. What could be the problems which are created by the negative situation that results from Marcuse's thesis on technology? For instance, how could the basis for the existence of opposing movements which are organized over the internet or the foundations of anti-capitalist radical critique be explained on the axis of Marcuse’s thesis? -/- There is a fundamental problem that has to be solved: if we declare only the validity of oppressive, central and ideological functions of technological devices, then the idea which is referred by authoritarian governments that current opposing movements or rebel groups organized over internet might be organized from a centre which is defined as imperialist power or external power becomes an affirmable argument. In other words, does Marcuse's technological determinist approach serves to legitimize the discourses such as "foreign powers or imperialist enemies," and so on which authoritarian powers frequently resort to. Is it possible to think of another alternative with regard to the problems produced by this rationality apart from the negative comments that revealed by the concept of technological rationality. From what frameworks this question can be answered In the conclusion of the study, answers to these questions have been searched. -/- Keywords: Technology, Knowledge, Criticism, Practice, Capitalist Society, Politics, Rationality. (shrink)

Until recently, the economic history of pre-colonial Africa was replete with uncomplimentary theories and from scholars of different disciplines. The belief was that the economy was subsistent, uniform, unchanging and very uninteresting. These theorists believed that the dominant agricultural sector was virtually immobilized by a combination of primitive technology, like communal land tenure and extended family, while the development of key entrepreneurial groups was inhibited by the prevalence of an anti-capitalist value system. The historical analytical method was adopted in this (...) research. The theories portrayed pre-colonial Africans as people that lacked the capacity to progress even though they lived in a rich environment. It was believed that it was not until the advent of the Europeans that positive changes were recorded. However, contrary to these theories, the Ibibio pre-colonial economy was premised on agriculture, complemented by trade and the existence of local industries. Thus, their pre-colonial economy was more coordinated, complex and diversified than the Eurocentric writers opined. The success recorded in this direction was activated by economic diplomacy which the Ibibio had practiced in the pre-colonial period. Issues relating to the economy were properly managed through the adoption of various relevant methods and strategies. Since the economy of a people operates in the society and remains fundamental to the survival of such society with the capacity to influence the political and other institutional decisions, economic diplomacy triggered holistic development in Ibibioland. Based on these, it recommended that present day Ibibio economy should not be totally divorced from these fundamental variables if the Ibibio are to be economically relevant in present day Nigeria. (shrink)

The Universal Law of Balance as the Key to Ethical AI and Internet Governance -/- The rapid advancement of internet technology and artificial intelligence (AI) has brought unprecedented opportunities for innovation, communication, and economic growth. However, the dominant profit-driven model of capitalism has also led to severe imbalances, particularly in the spread of black propaganda and misinformation. These issues arise because many websites, apps, and AI systems prioritize engagement and revenue over truth and societal well-being. If left unchecked, these imbalances (...) can distort human decision-making, manipulate public opinion, and destabilize societies. To correct this, the principles of the universal law of balance must be applied to both internet governance and AI development. A transition to a socialist or mixed economic system may be necessary to ensure that technological progress aligns with ethical and natural laws. -/- The Problem: Profit Motive and the Spread of Misinformation -/- In today’s digital economy, many technology companies generate revenue through engagement-based advertising. This creates a powerful incentive for social media platforms, news aggregators, and AI-driven content generators to promote sensational, misleading, or emotionally charged content—often at the expense of truth. Black propaganda, misinformation, and divisive narratives thrive in such an environment because they capture attention and increase user interaction. As a result, companies continue to profit while the public becomes more misinformed, leading to societal instability. -/- From the perspective of the universal law of balance, this system is defective. Just as a machine with faulty components will eventually break down, a society built on distorted information cannot function properly. For stability to be restored, the design of internet algorithms, content moderation policies, and economic incentives must be realigned with natural balance principles. -/- The Solution: A Balanced Economic Model for AI and Internet Governance -/- To address these systemic flaws, a shift away from pure capitalism toward a socialist or mixed economic system is necessary. This approach would introduce ethical guidelines, regulatory oversight, and alternative business models that prioritize balance over profit maximization. Some key solutions include: -/- 1. Regulated AI and Algorithms – Governments and international organizations should enforce ethical AI policies that prioritize factual, balanced content over engagement-driven misinformation. AI systems must be designed to detect and filter black propaganda while maintaining free speech. -/- 2. Publicly Funded Information Platforms – Just as public broadcasting services like BBC and PBS exist to provide reliable news, governments or independent organizations should develop non-profit digital platforms where truth and ethical journalism are prioritized. -/- 3. Accountability Measures for Tech Companies – Heavier fines, stricter regulations, and legal consequences for companies that knowingly spread misinformation could discourage profit-driven manipulation. -/- 4. Alternative Revenue Models – Encouraging subscription-based or non-profit AI platforms could reduce reliance on engagement-driven advertising, minimizing the incentive for misinformation. -/- 5. International Collaboration – The UN, World Economic Forum, or a new global body should establish a universal framework for AI ethics, ensuring all nations regulate technology in a way that aligns with the universal law of balance. -/- By restructuring the digital economy with these principles, internet governance can function more like a self-correcting natural system, reducing errors and restoring social stability. -/- AGI and the Universal Law of Balance -/- Beyond internet governance, the universal law of balance is also crucial for AGI development. If AGI is designed purely for corporate profit or national interests, it will likely be used for economic exploitation, political control, or even large-scale misinformation campaigns. However, if AGI is built on the principles of balance, it can serve as a force for truth and ethical decision-making. -/- An AGI aligned with the universal formula would: -/- Validate Information Using Natural Laws – Assess the accuracy of information based on objective, universal principles, rejecting misinformation. -/- Prevent Exploitation – Detect and counter propaganda, ensuring AI is not misused by corporations or governments. -/- Optimize Human Progress – Enhance decision-making for individuals and leaders, fostering rational and ethical societal development. -/- Self-Correct and Adapt – Continuously refine its understanding, eliminating systemic biases over time. -/- For AGI to truly function as a rational, human-level intelligence, it must be programmed with the universal law of balance. This will ensure that AI operates in harmony with nature and truth, rather than as a tool for profit-driven deception. -/- The Need for Global Political Will -/- The transition to a balanced internet and AI system will not happen voluntarily. Many governments and corporations benefit from misinformation and may resist ethical changes that limit their influence. Therefore, global political pressure is necessary to enforce these reforms. The UN, national governments, and independent oversight bodies must develop the political will to regulate AI and internet technology according to natural laws. Without this effort, profit-driven systems will continue to create instability, misinformation, and societal decay. -/- To prevent this, AI researchers, policymakers, and global institutions must adopt the universal formula as the guiding principle for future technological developments. Only by restoring balance—both in information systems and economic models—can AI and digital technology serve humanity rather than manipulate it. -/- Conclusion -/- The current digital economy, driven by profit at all costs, has created a system where misinformation spreads unchecked, causing severe societal imbalances. The universal law of balance offers a solution by ensuring that AI and internet technology function without defects or errors, just like any other natural system. To achieve this, a transition to a socialist or mixed economic model is necessary, along with strict regulations and ethical oversight. -/- Furthermore, AGI must be programmed with the universal formula to prevent it from becoming another tool for manipulation. If governments, the UN, and AI researchers embrace this framework, technology can be realigned with truth, ethical governance, and natural balance—leading to a more stable and just society. -/- . (shrink)

From antiquity to date, communal clashes, inter tribal even to global crisis of war is antecedented by penetration of ill-will, unfair sharing formula of human and natural resources by a privileged few resulting in high social, economic and political acrimony hence, the growing calls to reframe the politics of poverty reduction and social protection in particular, in terms of extending the ‘social contract’ to the poorest groups as people are getting increasingly aware of injustice. This premise is on the (...) widening gap between the rich and poor on daily bases. With the increase of awareness, knowledge, technology and the advent of post-modernist era, the quest for social justice has heightened. Even communism and democracy attempt to offer social justice to its natives. Communism states that humans are free to engage in any kind of occupation and express ourselves freely without government interference, unlike the alienated labour society of the capitalist industry: this for communism is social Justice, while democracy thinks equality before law and power to its natives is social justice. All through the era of Philosophy, Philosophers differ on the definition, and what constitute social justice. Until now, there is no unifying explanation on what social justice is and consists of. This paper tends to look into the history of social Justice and different philosophers from different epochs. It also tried to expose the problems inherent in the definition and what constitute social justice, and cautioned that complimentary imperative should be employ to curtail human egoistic tendency that aids social injustice. (shrink)

Kostas Axelos' 'Introduction to a Future Way of Thought' attempts to bring together two strong thinkers often thought to represent diametrically opposed political traditions: Martin Heidegger and Karl Marx. This review considers this attempt as a result of Axelos' political background, as a Greek communist revolutionary who emigrated to France and came into contact with Postwar French Heideggerian thought. Axeols then helped to establish the Heideggerian Marxism characteristic of the influential journal, Arguments.

Political economy has two major concepts of capital. In one, capital is defined as money. Adam Smith proposed the other, which considers capital as anything that has a role in the creation of wealth even if peripheral. It includes, for instance, machines, the biosphere (“nature capital” or “natural capital”), and even human beings (“human capital”). The concept of capitalism is generally derived from Smith's overinclusive concept of capital. This led to ambiguity and tautology. However, the pre-Smith concept of capital does (...) not require the concept of capitalism. By removing non-monetary elements from the concept of capital, this study reaches an alternative ‘monetary society in the biosphere’ concept, which avoids confusion regarding monetary and non-monetary flows. This new concept integrates the economic and societal production in the biosphere. Furthermore, it recognizes that various monetary flows can be detrimental to ecological crises. Abandoning the concept of capitalism can contribute to conceptual precision in addressing the political economy of societal, environmental, and green development phenomena. (shrink)

A broad set of public policy debates concern the limits of humanity’s control over nature. Attitudes towards such topics are not well explained by the standard 2-dimensional political model favored by political scientists of i) a left/right economic spectrum and ii) a liberal/authoritarian social spectrum. I pose a new, orthogonal, political spectrum to fill the void. It is a spectrum of value held for, on the one hand, nature, and on the other, technological progress. This harks back to the 18th (...) Century Enlightenment and Romanticism, but manifests again and again, including in recent debates about human enhancement biotechnology. (shrink)

This article explores the possibility that John Dewey’s silence on the matter of which democratic means are needed to achieve democratic ends, while confusing, makes greater sense if we appreciate the notion of political technology from an anthropological perspective. Michael Eldridge relates the exchange between John Herman Randall, Jr., and Dewey in which Dewey concedes “that I have done little or nothing in this direction [of outlining what constitutes adequate political technology, but that] does not detract from my recognition that (...) in the concrete the invention of such a technology is the heart of the problem of intelligent action in political matters.” Dewey’s concession could be interpreted as an admission that he was unqualified to identify political machinery or institutions suitable for realizing his vision of democracy as a way of life. Not being able to specify adequate means to achieve lofty democratic ends is not problematic, though, if we appreciate the roots of Dewey’s work (especially Human Nature and Conduct) in the anthropological writings of Immanuel Kant and Franz Boas. For then experience reflects a myriad of social and cultural conditions such that specifying explicit means to structure that experience risks stymieing the organic development of political practice. When pressured to operationalize political technology, he chose the appropriately open-ended and, at times, frustratingly vague means of education and growth. In short, Dewey did not want his ambitious democratic vision to outstrip the possibilities of practice, so he left the task of specifying exact political technology (or which democratic means are best suited to achieve democratic ends) unfinished. (shrink)

Western, secularized capitalism appraises the “worth” of a worker through a wage, a numerical value assumed to reflect the value of one’s time (in the case of hourly jobs) or contribution (in the case of salary or commision-based work). Computers and AI models are capable of matching and even exceeding human performance on a variety of tasks such as mathematical computation, handwritten digit recognition, and even complex tasks such as playing the game Go. Furthermore, they can work around the clock (...) with no need for sleep, healthcare, or even a salary. As a result, computers are more “valuable” than humans under capitalism because they are more productive (in terms of quantity and, in many cases, quality of work). Combined with an erosion of the religious idea of explicit human worth or dignity, other humans are seen as mere means to the ends of those powerful enough to exploit them. Any hope of reducing inequality or promoting justice must come from an explicit belief in the “value” of human life independent of his or her ability to produce. (shrink)

With the desperate usurpation of global spaces under the everexpanding capitalist mode of production, the political struggle still necessitates an emancipatory class politics as aimed by Marx and Engels. This paper will be a synthesis of Marxist geographer David Harvey’s theory of capitalist production of space and MarxEngels’ notion of freedom, and their notion of emancipatory class politics. According to David Harvey, its survival as a system is through its widescale control on the production of spaces. I will (...) first expose the theory of the Marxist geographer David Harvey on how capitalism produces a space through his theory of the capitalist production of space. This necessary strategy of capitalism to own and extend to spaces is essential to its nature to increase capital and profit. According to him, capitalism always needs to expand territories to create new sources of labor, wealth, and new markets. This necessitates obtaining profits to sustain capital accumulation amidst its problem of crises. The spatial ontology of capital will be the springboard showing a possible construction of the type of freedom or emancipation that is necessary in forwarding a class politics of spatiality. In effect, emancipating the place is tied with the classical notion of the liberation of the proletariat. I conceptualize the concept of place as a signifier of the spaces that humanity produces—may it be their home, their work, or geometries of modern life—but have been put under the dictates and design of capital. Thus, I will go back to the classical notion of emancipatory politics of Marx and Engels. This synthesis combines the possibility of emancipatory class politics based on the ontology of the present capitalist production of space. (shrink)

Capitalism is defined as the economic structure in which decisions over production are largely made by or on behalf of individuals in virtue of their private property ownership, subject to the incentives and constraints of market competition. In this paper, I will argue that considerations of long-term welfare, such as those developed by Greaves and MacAskill (2021), support anticapitalism in a weak sense (reducing the extent to which the economy is capitalistic) and perhaps support anticapitalism in a stronger sense (establishing (...) an alternative economic structure in which capitalism is not predominant). I hope to encourage longtermists to give anticapitalism serious consideration, and to encourage anticapitalists to pursue criticisms of capitalism’s efficiency as well as its injustices. (shrink)

La autonomía constituye uno de los pilares básicos de un sistema político como el democrático que se asocia a la capacidad de toma de decisiones de la ciudadanía como su núcleo moral principal. Los descubrimientos en el ámbito de las neurociencias y su aplicación al campo del marketing y a la comunicación política despiertan hoy en día las sospechas por la posible capacidad de activar el "botón del voto" de los electores. Este artículo tiene como objetivo adentrarse en el estudio (...) de los principales trabajos desarrollados sobre el neuromarketing político y la neuropolítica. La finalidad de esta propuesta consiste en presentar los debates éticos que irrumpen con el neuromarketing político. Autonomy is one of the basic pillars of a political system like democracy, which is associated with citizens’ decision-making capacity as its main moral core. Discoveries in the neurosciences domain and their application to the marketing and political communication field now arouse suspicions about the possible capacity of activating voter’s "voting button". The objective of this article is to examine the main works on political neuromarketing and neuropolitics. The purpose of this proposal consists in presenting the specific ethical debates that emerge around political neuromarketing. (shrink)

That technologies may raise ethical issues is now widely recognised. The ‘responsible innovation’ literature – as well as, to a lesser extent, the applied ethics and bioethics literature – has responded to the need for ethical reflection on technologies by developing a number of tools and approaches to facilitate such reflection. Some of these instruments consist of lists of questions that people are encouraged to ask about technologies – a methodology known as the ‘Socratic approach’. However, to date, these instruments (...) have often not adequately acknowledged various political impacts of technologies, which are, I suggest, essential to a proper account of the ethical issues they raise. New technologies can make some people richer and some people poorer, empower some and disempower others, have dramatic implications for relationships between different social groups and impact on social understandings and experiences that are central to the lives, and narratives, of denizens of technological societies. The distinctive contribution of this paper, then, is to offer a revised and updated version of the Socratic approach that highlights the political, as well as the more traditionally ethical, issues raised by the development of new technologies. (shrink)