Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

________deleted wrote (edited )

But those wouldn't be anarcho-transhumanists, they'd be capitalist-imperialists. A big reason to support anarcho-transhumanism is to provide a non-oppressive alternative to capitalist-imperialist-transhumanism.

5

[deleted] wrote (edited )

4

________deleted wrote

If a political theory doesn't evolve with the times, it will be left behind.

4

watermelon OP wrote (edited )

Honestly, that sounds a lot like what would happen to people too poor to afford gene alteration.

1

________deleted wrote

Then you should support communist / anarchist transhumanism so that everyone gets access to the technology.

4

watermelon OP wrote

everyone gets access to the technology

That would only be possible in a world with unlimited resources.

2

________deleted wrote

Communism and post-scarcity go hand in hand, so that's not really an issue. There's more than enough for everyone, but capitalists keep it restricted to only the wealthy.

7

soylentbomb wrote

It doesn't already have a coherent model of interacting with the larger world, nor with the material conditions of our selves.

1

[deleted] wrote

2

________deleted wrote

I mean, I didn't decide what 'anarcho-transhumanism' is, it's been pre-defined as a communist, hierarchy-less ideology.

4

Pop wrote

I think part of what's being questioned is whether the definition is even coherent in the first place

like how 'anarcho'-capitalism is also incoherent

since it's not clear that technology of this kind is compatible with anarchy

3