The fact of the matter is that humans will suffer and die, no matter what you do.
Accelerating will kill and harm less people in the long run. It’s a simple math equation of having more people suffer now for a shorter amount of time vs having people suffer and die until the end of time.
Accelerationism will cause less suffering after a certain amount of time. It could be as a little as a decade of lasting capitalism causing the same amount of suffering and death as a accelerating the collapse of capitalism.
And yes progress has been made, but it is not a law of nature. We have also regressed again over the past century. Currently we’re sliding back with the collapse of the Soviet Union and humanity failing to advance past capitalism.
Technological progress will keep increasing quality of life to a point, but on a societal level we’ve been regressing since the 90s.
Saying reform will get us to a better place is a questionable argument. Historically reform has not achieved nearly as much as revolution. Reform let to Nazi dictatorship in Germany and in general the rise of fascism (as it might soon once again). Not a single time has socialism been established via reform. The one time it was attempted peacefully was in Chile. The response was a coup from an unpurged military and sympathisers in unpurged institutions with support from the CIA.
Meanwhile revolution dragged Russia from an unindustrialised backwater to a nation running one of the first space programs in the world within only 40 years.
Likewise the French revolution led to the spread of liberalism and republicanism throughout the western world. It is the single most important reason why we live in the world we do today and not one of absolutism.
Revolution is why the USA is an independent nation and not a colony anymore.
Do you think those would have been achieved with reform? If yes, do you think how much longer this would have taken and how many more would have continued suffering during this time would be worth it?
I do subscribe to accelerationism.
The fact of the matter is that humans will suffer and die, no matter what you do.
Accelerating will kill and harm less people in the long run. It’s a simple math equation of having more people suffer now for a shorter amount of time vs having people suffer and die until the end of time. Accelerationism will cause less suffering after a certain amount of time. It could be as a little as a decade of lasting capitalism causing the same amount of suffering and death as a accelerating the collapse of capitalism.
And yes progress has been made, but it is not a law of nature. We have also regressed again over the past century. Currently we’re sliding back with the collapse of the Soviet Union and humanity failing to advance past capitalism. Technological progress will keep increasing quality of life to a point, but on a societal level we’ve been regressing since the 90s.
Saying reform will get us to a better place is a questionable argument. Historically reform has not achieved nearly as much as revolution. Reform let to Nazi dictatorship in Germany and in general the rise of fascism (as it might soon once again). Not a single time has socialism been established via reform. The one time it was attempted peacefully was in Chile. The response was a coup from an unpurged military and sympathisers in unpurged institutions with support from the CIA.
Meanwhile revolution dragged Russia from an unindustrialised backwater to a nation running one of the first space programs in the world within only 40 years. Likewise the French revolution led to the spread of liberalism and republicanism throughout the western world. It is the single most important reason why we live in the world we do today and not one of absolutism. Revolution is why the USA is an independent nation and not a colony anymore.
Do you think those would have been achieved with reform? If yes, do you think how much longer this would have taken and how many more would have continued suffering during this time would be worth it?