Fascinating read, both for the title and the topic tackled and recommendations.
So, I think that history is a very good source of ideas and of inspiration on what to do next, something which I think is neglected by the EA movement in general and its primary actors specifically—I would even argue that Toby Ord’s answer to you was lukewarm at best if not just polite at worst. (though i do remember tackling a fascinating book by a historian in my first book club participation).
As for the topic, I’d like to provide some comments (these are just my ignorant comments, not to be treated as authoritative in any way). First from what I remember, some of the Fabian ideas, such as at least the vote for women, were around way before the Fabians—according to Wikipedia, “A member of the Liberal Party and author of the early feminist workThe Subjection of Women, Mill was also the second member of Parliament to call for women’s suffrage after Henry Hunt in 1832.[5][6]” (here’s he link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill ). Wikipedia does not seem to consider J.S. Mill or his predecessor Henry Hunt as a Fabian.
Furthermore, I think that in the grand scheme of historical progress, it may actually be a bit more randomly that some movements’ ideas get applied and other’s not, or even the extent that these ideas are ‘theirs’ as opposed to mostly around in the ether (or zeitgeist, in other words). So, for example, I think many of the concrete ideas you attribute to the Fabians probably overlapped with other socialist or other thinkers of the time, and on the other hand, as Ord remarks, their ways of influencing and pushing their agenda forward may have also had to do more with peculiarities of British culture (groups of gentlemen, usually rich, in a stratified society, rather than say mass revolution—even Science, a previous quintessentially British revolution in 1650, was for many years practiced and propagated only among learned Gentlemen).
As for communism, in your introduction, I’d be a bit more charitable, in recognising many of its positive ideas such as trade unions, though i wouldn’t hasten to contradict the preceding paragraph of the text by remarking that maybe many of the measures suggested by Marx may have also drawn from the Zeitgeist of mid-to end of the 10th century. Also however i’d remark that it’s possible for communism to have the last laugh after all as I heard some time ago that whereas in the first half of the twentieth century it was the poor and uneducated who supported it, nowadays it’s also championed by many educated people in the US (think, of course in a much more constrained way, of the support for Bernie Sanders).
Anyway, History’s a funny thing, so you never know what may be rediscovered later and where its random (according to me, even though that’s one of the huge points of contention i have with EA doctrine—longtermism - ) walk will take us and which movements will be deemed to have influenced what in the future.
And a note on your recommendations, yeah, it sounds good to attract elites, but yeah, as a personal life-choice, i’ve recently decided that for my biggest passions and struggles i choose to fight, I would go with the non-elite masses—at least that’s the aspiration.
As for Toby Ord’s answer, it was in a friendly personal message and I quoted part of it most relevant to the post.
Regarding that some ideas were not unique to the Fabians—you are absolutely right about Mill, one of the people who I admire. Unfortunately, at his time he was unable to do anything to implement his proposal—and I wanted to take into account not only the idea but the implementation, too.
Regarding the rest, I’ll be glad to discuss all this personally.
Many thanks for getting back to me, yes, I agree that having a method to actually implement your wishful revolutionary thinking is very important, and yes, that could be the base of a long and fascinating discussion i’d like to have over a glass of wine and/or good food :)
Dear Alex,
Fascinating read, both for the title and the topic tackled and recommendations.
So, I think that history is a very good source of ideas and of inspiration on what to do next, something which I think is neglected by the EA movement in general and its primary actors specifically—I would even argue that Toby Ord’s answer to you was lukewarm at best if not just polite at worst. (though i do remember tackling a fascinating book by a historian in my first book club participation).
As for the topic, I’d like to provide some comments (these are just my ignorant comments, not to be treated as authoritative in any way). First from what I remember, some of the Fabian ideas, such as at least the vote for women, were around way before the Fabians—according to Wikipedia, “A member of the Liberal Party and author of the early feminist work The Subjection of Women, Mill was also the second member of Parliament to call for women’s suffrage after Henry Hunt in 1832.[5][6]” (here’s he link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill ). Wikipedia does not seem to consider J.S. Mill or his predecessor Henry Hunt as a Fabian.
Furthermore, I think that in the grand scheme of historical progress, it may actually be a bit more randomly that some movements’ ideas get applied and other’s not, or even the extent that these ideas are ‘theirs’ as opposed to mostly around in the ether (or zeitgeist, in other words). So, for example, I think many of the concrete ideas you attribute to the Fabians probably overlapped with other socialist or other thinkers of the time, and on the other hand, as Ord remarks, their ways of influencing and pushing their agenda forward may have also had to do more with peculiarities of British culture (groups of gentlemen, usually rich, in a stratified society, rather than say mass revolution—even Science, a previous quintessentially British revolution in 1650, was for many years practiced and propagated only among learned Gentlemen).
As for communism, in your introduction, I’d be a bit more charitable, in recognising many of its positive ideas such as trade unions, though i wouldn’t hasten to contradict the preceding paragraph of the text by remarking that maybe many of the measures suggested by Marx may have also drawn from the Zeitgeist of mid-to end of the 10th century. Also however i’d remark that it’s possible for communism to have the last laugh after all as I heard some time ago that whereas in the first half of the twentieth century it was the poor and uneducated who supported it, nowadays it’s also championed by many educated people in the US (think, of course in a much more constrained way, of the support for Bernie Sanders).
Anyway, History’s a funny thing, so you never know what may be rediscovered later and where its random (according to me, even though that’s one of the huge points of contention i have with EA doctrine—longtermism - ) walk will take us and which movements will be deemed to have influenced what in the future.
And a note on your recommendations, yeah, it sounds good to attract elites, but yeah, as a personal life-choice, i’ve recently decided that for my biggest passions and struggles i choose to fight, I would go with the non-elite masses—at least that’s the aspiration.
Best Wishes,
Haris
Dear Haris,
Thank you for the interesting comments.
As for Toby Ord’s answer, it was in a friendly personal message and I quoted part of it most relevant to the post.
Regarding that some ideas were not unique to the Fabians—you are absolutely right about Mill, one of the people who I admire. Unfortunately, at his time he was unable to do anything to implement his proposal—and I wanted to take into account not only the idea but the implementation, too.
Regarding the rest, I’ll be glad to discuss all this personally.
Best wishes,
Alex
Dear Alex,
Many thanks for getting back to me, yes, I agree that having a method to actually implement your wishful revolutionary thinking is very important, and yes, that could be the base of a long and fascinating discussion i’d like to have over a glass of wine and/or good food :)
Best Wishes,
Haris