It would perhaps take a lot of time to do a map between the future as CCP sees and future as Balaji sees it.
all this seems a wee bit in reverse, only once hard POWER is WON, can a society/state aim towards culture. 2 paisa worth experience
how society’s “software” (culture, values, attitudes) shapes political destiny as much as its “hardware” (economics, systems, institutions). While seemingly a straightforward idea, this was notably a daring break from the materialism of orthodox Marxism. Ref - https://palladiummag.com/2021/10/11/the-triumph-and-terror-of-wang-huning/
This is great and manages to articulate everything that I love and find infuriating about Balaji.
I’m curious whether the book casts itself in explicitly libertarian terms or tries to frame its argument as ‘above’ politics. If the latter, how successfully does it do this?
My gut reaction to the concept is that it would lead to more siloing and intellectual echo chambers, not less. I expect that each network state will end up being built around a particular USP issue (e.g., as you suggest in the piece, ‘FDA free’.) Having alignment with a certain political viewpoint as an implicit precondition for membership of a state does not sound like an attractive prospect.
I really appreciate the way you distinguish the useful parts of the book from those that are less so. Really clarifying analysis as I work my way through it myself!
Does The Network State ever rise above its techbro starting point? Does it, for example, talk about how families can thrive in a network state? Does it talk about how one can form lasting bonds that outlast a job? Or is it simply more of the same naive techno-optimism?
So good. His podcast with Lex Fridman is the best ever
It would perhaps take a lot of time to do a map between the future as CCP sees and future as Balaji sees it.
all this seems a wee bit in reverse, only once hard POWER is WON, can a society/state aim towards culture. 2 paisa worth experience
how society’s “software” (culture, values, attitudes) shapes political destiny as much as its “hardware” (economics, systems, institutions). While seemingly a straightforward idea, this was notably a daring break from the materialism of orthodox Marxism. Ref - https://palladiummag.com/2021/10/11/the-triumph-and-terror-of-wang-huning/
Nice summary. Balaji has a real talent of looking at social issues with an electrical engineering visualization.
This is great and manages to articulate everything that I love and find infuriating about Balaji.
I’m curious whether the book casts itself in explicitly libertarian terms or tries to frame its argument as ‘above’ politics. If the latter, how successfully does it do this?
My gut reaction to the concept is that it would lead to more siloing and intellectual echo chambers, not less. I expect that each network state will end up being built around a particular USP issue (e.g., as you suggest in the piece, ‘FDA free’.) Having alignment with a certain political viewpoint as an implicit precondition for membership of a state does not sound like an attractive prospect.
I really appreciate the way you distinguish the useful parts of the book from those that are less so. Really clarifying analysis as I work my way through it myself!
Does The Network State ever rise above its techbro starting point? Does it, for example, talk about how families can thrive in a network state? Does it talk about how one can form lasting bonds that outlast a job? Or is it simply more of the same naive techno-optimism?