If you have "no place to go," come here!

Corrente Abuse a Leading Indicator of TED Talkers' Talk

claud_alexander's picture

Difficult for satire to stay ahead of these people

Relevant paragraph of my attempt at the former, posted here on June 4, read

By then the book will probably already be a hit, with enough popular traction for some Krugman to chime in with a clever, chin-scratching blog post about how, before technological unemployment started to affect humans, it affected horses, who saw their livelihoods disappear as railroads and automobiles became increasingly prevalent (“What Mr Ed Can Tell Us About the Rise of the Robots”). "Entire landscapes changed as technology replaced a once pervasive form of labor and created new ones. Uncertainty gripped those who felt their livelihoods threatened. Am I talking about America after NAFTA? No, I'm talking about cities like New York in the 1920s, when automobiles gradually replaced horses as. . . Would we really see the resulting gross inequality between the median nose-bag and the average pay of workers in automotive plants as a reason sufficient to restrict humanity to the use of non-equine transport?", etc. etc.

Latter's co-authored long piece in Foreign Affairs "Will Humans Go the Way of Horses?" went online on the 16th, going by the date in its url, and is apparently not aiming at straight-faced parody with sentences such as

In the future, it’s not unreasonable to expect people to vote for policies that will help them avoid the economic fate of the horse.


a final important difference between horses and humans will become clear: humans can revolt

Now, my earlier Corrente post was, in turn, repurposing an earlier comment I had made in nakedcapitalism, where the parody included an explicit TED-talking neoliberal water-carrying role for Steve Pinker, who promptly the next day showed up in that exact capacity over at Vox.

Thus, since mainstream economists have no problem daring to be silly and are often additionally fans of fucking scifi, I hold hope that one will soon pop up boldly thought-experimenting about cooking chimps and inter-species free trade.

No votes yet


Submitted by lambert on

Trying to work out the scenarios, here... Although no doubt the 1% regard themselves as superior beings, so they might well think of themselves as a separate species. Why not?

claud_alexander's picture
Submitted by claud_alexander on

You're quite right, they *do* already consider themselves to be a different species, don't they?
(To repeat, )

Since I wasn't brought up among the elite exactly (for purely eccentric reasons), I'm always surprised by how they really just assume themselves to be an elite, in spite of facts such as "one of the open secrets about our tastemaker class [is that] they don’t read.",

[obv. not saying anything about the twitter beef from which the above taken: quoting the thing simply b/c it references something I observed as well].

Submitted by lambert on

"Are you against incivility itself or are you against incivility towards those in your in-group who you actually contemplate as a real live human being?"