Mindscape 57 | Astra Taylor on the Promise and Challenge of Democracy

[@MattieCooper10000]

Your podcasts are so Great! Thank you, Sean!

[@TheOriginalRaster]

She (Astra Taylor) tries to talk so fast it's ridiculous. It's like she's on cocaine. Also, she laughs as a huge outburst when she states things that are truly horrendous. Sean doesn't have either of these problems for example. Astra Taylor seems to be laughing when the peaks of dark humor come up. Someone tell Astra Taylor to try to slow down a little bit. If you have good ideas, why do you have to machine-gun rip words so fast that you're skipping every third word plus mis-pronouncing words just out of the sheer attempt to rip at max vocal word speed. This podcast is a tug of war between wanting to continue listening because the conversation is good, versus being repulsed by Astra Taylor sometimes obnoxious timing of when and how to laugh and her attempt to simultaneously set a land-speed-record of words per second that a person can try and fail to say while still being understood. Sean is such a good example, when he speaks it, via contrast, shows Astra's verbal communication problems. Cheers!

[@OMAR-vq3yb]

You must be a joy to be around. Astra sounds fine. Maybe a little excited to speak to a person she admires, but it comes off as endearing than problematic (i'm sure Sean feels the same way).

[@globaldigitaldirectsubsidi4493]

"Don´t become a man of success, try to be a man of value." - Albert Einstein

[@chrisrecord5625]

The population of the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area is slightly over 19 million and NYC is bigger still. The total population of the ten smallest states totals less than 10 million. These smaller states have 20 senators. LA metro has a diluted vote for two senators. The distortion relative to representative democracy is clear. Larry Sabato, at the University of Virginia, has a proposal that speaks to rebalancing some of the inequities that exist in with the electoral college and the senate, however, it would require a constitutional convention which would be problematic on several levels. Thoughts?

[@Beradikals]

Chris Record ... the “National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Agreement” is a way to approach this problem without changing the constitution directly.

[@mal2ksc]

You are at the mercy of the five percent nation. It only takes that tiny fraction to block ratification of a constitutional amendment. How? It was built into the Constitution that way. 1. Ratifying an amendment requires that 3/4 of the states (so currently 37) sign on. That means no more than 13 can hold out against it. 2. The least populous 14 states hold 5% of the population of the country. Therefore, 5% of the people can block the will of the other 95%, and _this is by design._ docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1oz9oE1EJ4kK0Lx8Zjf17Y1nM4HkJApk_Azl37FwYfyk/edit if you want the actual (2017) population numbers used to make these calculations.

[@chrisrecord5625]

@@Beradikals Thanks, I am aware of that attempt to level the field in the Electoral College but it does not address the state senatorial distortion. The bottom ten states, population-wise, constitute 3% of the population but control 20 senate seats. California has 12% of the population but has 2 seats. I think 17% of the population controls 41 senate seats. Overall, including the Electoral College v. population election of the President, we need thoughtful discourse.

[@chrisrecord5625]

@@mal2ksc I think they round up so its 38 states needed to approve an amendment. Otherwise, things have changed since the constitution was approved. There are fifty states rather than 13 and they are no longer as homogeneous as in the past. The population discrepancy is far greater among states and the voters are no longer just white males. The design then may be a bug now. Nevertheless, if more people are just aware of these issues, as you are, the better.

[@freetrailer4poor]

The senate should be ended, and the house should be ended. The president should have a 6 month term. Limited to 4 years.

[@blitzlegga]

Hello Sean, I've written to you before and I've contributed to your Patreon account under a different name. I’m writing you on this platform because I believe that other folks like me would like to hear what you have to say about this matter. I have a moral question for you. Do you subscribe to Tom Campbell's belief that we live in a virtual reality simulation? He uses quantum mechanics to back his theory and he’s even pointed to some your (and other physicist) lectures to validate his theory of reality. If you do agree with this theory, I would like for you to consider the dangers of that theory and how it may affect human kind: If you agree that we live in a virtual reality simulation, then that means we are pretty much living in a "video game". The dangerous implications of this theory are that we never really die. We just "re-spawn" into a different (or similar) life form after we die, just like in a video game, and there really is no such thing as death (to the consciousness). Therefore, the link between killing a physical being and actually killing that conscience being, becomes decoupled. The problem with this logic is that this could give ammunition to certain people in our society who want to kill innocent people at will. In a video game, you can kill people with the understanding that you never are REALLY killing that person. You are only killing their “avatar”, while the real person (their consciousness) will continue to live on outside of the simulation until they re-spawn. Imagine what this means to a serial killer, a mass shooter, or an evil dictator. Their actions would have zero consequence because they are only committing murder in the physiological sense. They are only killing an avatar. They would not hesitate to kill as many avatars as they see fit to quench their desires, because the theory allows for it with no consequence. I think you should consider what I just stated and use your platform to inform the scientific world of the ramifications of that theory. It’s a dangerous theory and, if widely accepted, could lead to an even more devaluation of human life.

[@WalterWartenweilerPrivate]

I have a couple of impressions here about assumptions made: 1) that people exclude others as opposed to people are manipulated by the system to see others as enemies fighting for their pie share. 2) that life is black and white: you elect X and this will happen or you elect Y and something else will. All problems have 1000s of potential solutions and the people are never involved in crafting those so it becomes black and white. 3) that a community is by definition exclusive. It’s linked to 1): I’m almost sure that if communities would be self managing and ensuring that they manage their resources then they would be more inclusive as people.

[@WalterWartenweilerPrivate]

There are two ways of protecting the minorities from the majority mob rule: 1) delegate power to an enlightened person balancing. Looking at how much light shines from our rulers I doubt. 2) include the minorities in crafting the decisions in the following way: any person participating in the crafting and disagreeing with the current impact of the law being crafted needs to object to it and make a counterproposal that 1) solves the problem 2) removes the root of his objections. Iterate on that until no objection is found.

[@myothersoul1953]

I don't think democracy will work. I do think democracy is what we should do. I think democracy is what us humans deserve.

[@robertglass1698]

Astra, amazing. Good job getting her on Sean, I'm glad to know about her. She actually understands what is happening to our society. And finally I hear someone point out that the rich are a protected minority; and that our country is designed to protect minorities specifically as a mechanism to protect the wealthy from the wrath of those who they exploit. I would also like to hear someone point out that in a world where we basically can't discriminate against anyone--we can still discriminate against the poor.

[@globaldigitaldirectsubsidi4493]

"The economic anarchy of capitalism is the root of all evil." - Albert Einstein

[@lands4life1]

She brings a Canadian + Female Liberal to talk about American politics! Not that smart.

[@myothersoul1953]

Why can't a Canadian or a female talk about american politics?

[@Valdagast]

I wonder if Rawls gave passing grades (a social good) based on what would benefit the least fortunate in society or whether he used the more pedestrian method of trying to assess knowledge via tests.

[@freetrailer4poor]

The reason why poor science is the teacher does not have to have a ms bs in science to teach. The teacher needs to pass a test.

[@skonther0ck]

Great conversation Sean. Lots of fuel for thought. Thanks so much!

[@freetrailer4poor]

I like this lotto idea. You don't have to yell at someone to make a name for yourself.

[@freetrailer4poor]

Education should all be private. It can be free if you require 25-50% of future income goes to the school.

[@myothersoul1953]

Education should be free. If you make it private you invite censorship based on private interest. An education public is essential to democracy.

[@paulanderson3772]

Never mind sports legends, rock stars, or movie celebrities.........my hero studies the Cosmos.

[@CaptainFrantic]

Winston Churchill is reputed to have two quite cogent and incisive quotes regarding democracy; "... democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried ..." and "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.". EDIT - It has been pointed out (rather rudely) that this second quote is, in fact, erroneous. It's still a good sound byte though. :)

[@panlan1]

churchill-history will be kind to me...i find nothing admirable about this supposed gentleman...

[@CaptainFrantic]

@@panlan1 Maybe, but I don't need to admire someone to admit that they make a damn good point or two.

[@rollingrock3480]

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." Churchill never said that, stop watching Fox News. winstonchurchill.org/publications/finest-hour/finest-hour-141/history-detectives-red-herrings-famous-words-churchill-never-said/

[@panlan1]

no offence aimed at u captain...i'm a student of history....and by means of my research, i find the fat man to have been absurdly treacherous, manipulative, duplicitous and solely responsible for the loss of countless fellow human beings lives or livelihoods...whose lives would easily have been spared and/or been subject to less suffering without his lordshit's incessant meddling...karma is a bitch..mine is with him...not you..peace;

[@panlan1]

thanks rock;

[@caljente]

To be perfectly honest the indirect invocation of conspiracy theories in this episode is somewhat disappointing. im not familiar with the guest maybe casual talks tend to be more polemic. or maybe i just misinterpreting her claims.

[@rollingrock3480]

You're not alone. Her claim that (I'm paraphrasing) "An educated public is scary and I think that's behind a lot of the anti-education policy in our country" is a bit out there. I think it's just a matter of the Southern states seeing education as a force that converts their kids into liberals. If that's what she meant by scary, then okay. But that's not the impression I got.

[@mal2ksc]

I'm afraid much of this is a feature, not a bug. It is not by accident that rural voters are disproportionately powerful. Rather, it was necessary to concede that to them to get them to sign on in the first place, and now we're stuck with it. •It takes only 5% (consisting of the 14 lowest-population states) to refuse to ratify a Constitutional amendment, regardless of the will of the other 95%. •On the flip side, less than 40% of the population (representing 38 states) could ram such an amendment down the throats of those of us in the larger states, because over half of the population is concentrated in ten states. •54 of 100 Senate seats are in the hands of less than 18% of the population. Here are the numbers to back it up, if you think I'm making this up. docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1oz9oE1EJ4kK0Lx8Zjf17Y1nM4HkJApk_Azl37FwYfyk/edit

[@chrisrecord5625]

Great information to review. Jefferson recommended a constitutional convention for every generation. While that might be excessive every 200 years might not be, but I am aware of how that can spin out of control.

[@drzecelectric4302]

I’m in love

[@freetrailer4poor]

She didn't go to school but decides in her opinion kids go to school? Parents are responsible for their kids.

[@quill444]

In a Democracy, you can always get a job, and share your silly opinion, even if you're stupid . . . working hard for the guy who isn't so stupid. - j q t -

[@leonenriquez5031]

Mindscape guest wishlist: Yuval Noah Harari Stuart Hameroff Anand Giridharadas Rutger Bregman Frederick Stjernfelt Carlo Rovelli (again)

[@DavoidJohnson]

I don't detect much in the way of philosophy here. Philosophy will often attempt to get to the root of issues with particular emphasis on how people think. Critical in judging the relavance and accuracy of what we are told , is how we process that information. I consider that the large degree of self- serving politics inflicted upon us is due to weak/ gullible thinking on behalf of the voting public.

[@globaldigitaldirectsubsidi4493]

Only global direct democracy would be sincere democracy, we have statecapitalism with indirect democracy.

[@martenjustrell446]

And then people starts to vote against people they dont like. Asian votes to dump all waste in Australia. Democracy must be local and the people must be fairly homogeneous else we only get the majority ruling over the minority in questions where no one is willing to compromise. Voting on 3 or 5 percent tax for education will probably end up in the loosing side accepting it. Voting for throwing gays from buildings or not is not some thing the loosing side probably will not accept. A vote must have weight or it's pointless.

[@globaldigitaldirectsubsidi4493]

@@martenjustrell446 global votes are of a different kind. Only proposals that the majority actually agrees on, succeed, they are usually not sociopathic. Global laws should be applied to global problems like geopolitics, it can tremedously reduce the pointless greed and bureaucracy, when countries can agree on certain standards like taxation.