Dialogue

Expertise - section 13

 

13

 

"Yes, that's what it amounts to. Do you see them having any other choice?" asked Director.

 

"No. But why do they oppose technology? Don't they see the benefits?"

 

"Of course they do. But they think the risks outweigh them."

 

"What are the risks?"

 

"For one, there is the destruction of the world - bombs, germs, pollution, and so on."

 

"What else?"

 

"The conscious, or unintentional, physical change of man."

 

"Why is that a risk?"

 

"No one knows what it will mean."

 

"What else?"

 

"Political risk. Liberal democracy is not simple democracy. Technology threatens to bring simple democracy. No simple democracy has ever lasted very long. What happens next? That's the risk."

 

"So all of the technology risk is basically that we don't know where it leads and what will happen as a result of its continued development."

 

"Yes. Why do you think progressives don't fear these risks as much as conservatives?"

 

"They have faith in progress."

 

"And conservatives don't."

 

"No, they don't."

-------

Nick Pappas, pappasnick.typepad.com

Expertise - section 12

 

12

 

"So," said Director, "that means an international conservative movement is called for if one hopes to check technology globally."

 

"People, the peoples, won't have it."

 

"The conservatives would have to find ways either to persuade them or cut them out of the decision making process."

 

"Suppose they do. What about all of the expertise out there, the scientific-technological expertise?"

 

"Maybe the conservatives could buy them, pay them to stop."

 

"You mean like give them titles with nothing to do but enjoy their new, modest wealth?"

 

"Yes. Do you think many would go along?"

 

"Yes, I do. But what about the ones who refuse, the zealots?"

 

"Dry up their funding."

 

"But what if the progressives of great wealth continue to fund them?"

 

"There must be a war between conservatives and progressives, with the goal of bankrupting as many of the progressives as possible. The same holds politically - vote out as many progressives as possible."

 

"And if push comes to shove? Must there be a war, a fighting war? And if so, aren't the conservatives doomed? Won't the progressive technology win out in the end?"

 

"Maybe the conservatives have to stay up to date, or even slightly ahead, until the war is over and then shut the advance of technology down."

 

"So they have to go against their grain in order to win the right to go with their grain."

-------

Nick Pappas, pappasnick.typepad.com 

Expertise - section 11

 

11

 

"Now, how does this play in terms of expertise?" asked Director.

 

"Conservatives, true conservatives, will be experts in conserving - wealth and values. Progressives will be experts in progressing - technology."

 

"Only technology? What about their values?"

 

"They generally see liberal democratic values as universal, so they try to further their adoption throughout the world."

 

"And the conservatives don't?"

 

"Not the true conservatives."

 

"And the true conservatives want nothing to do with the advance of technology?"

 

"No, they don't."

 

"Are the true conservatives, as we are calling them, the only dyke against the flood of endlessly progressing technology?"

 

"I can't think of any other."

 

"So, for those who think technology is moving too fast, is going too far, a high concentration of wealth in the hands of conservatives is the only solution. Or can you think of something else?"

 

"The other solution would be for those opposed to the endless progress, the endless advance of technology, to try and educate enough people that representatives are elected who legislate against technology."

 

"But all the first world nations compete in technological terms."

 

"Yes, so it's very unlikely a nation will opt out. It would be left out. It would be at risk."

-------

Nick Pappas, pappasnick.typepad.com 

Expertise - section 10

 

10

 

"What about a communist with a great amount of wealth as opposed to a capitalist with a great amount of wealth?" asked Director. "Isn't that more interesting?"

 

"Well, the capitalist is supposed to have wealth, but the communist is not."

 

"What about a conservative?"

 

"He shouldn't be in the business of acquiring wealth. His business is the having, the long standing possession, of wealth."

 

"Wealth that was acquired back in the misty dawn of history?"

 

"Yes."

 

"And here is where inheritance is key, yes? If you're in the business of having instead of acquiring you must get it as part of your right of birth."

 

"Yes, that's true. But that's not how we think of conservatives today."

 

"Maybe we don't have true conservatives today. Maybe true conservatives conserve, primarily, wealth."

 

"Our conservatives conserve values, values that are handed on to them."

 

"But the progressives, or liberals, do the same with values, do they not?"

 

"Yes, I suppose that's true."

 

"In either case, they are values within the framework of liberal democracy, right?"

 

"Yes, that's the mainstream, at least."

 

"Are there any politically significant values falling outside this framework?"

 

"There are fringe groups that one day may be significant, but no."

-------

Nick Pappas, pappasnick.typepad.com 

Expertise - section 9

 

9

 

"Through war - political war, economic war, actual war," said Friend.

 

"Is there never voluntary transfer?"

 

"Not of significant amounts."

 

"What sort of people make voluntary transfers?"

 

"They are often called philanthropists."

 

"Aren't some of them at war with family and friends who feel entitled, who see their inheritance being squandered, as they see it?"

 

"You know, I never thought of it like that - but yes, they, too, are at war."

 

"Against parasites?"

 

"Yes, and they take great pride in giving to those who are not parasites, those who just could use a lucky break to get them through misfortune."

 

"Now, you said voluntary transfer of wealth does not occur in significant amounts. Don't some philanthropists have great amounts of wealth?"

 

"Yes, that's true - but they spread the wealth around, so its power is diffused."

 

"But aren't those the only choices - concentrated wealth, diffuse wealth? Why do you write off half of the equation?"

 

"The real choice is between concentrated wealth in what types of hands."

 

"You mean like a conservative with great wealth as opposed to a progressive with great wealth?"

 

"Yes."

-------

Nick Pappas, pappasnick.typepad.com 

Expertise - section 8

 

8

 

"Isn't that the definition of creativity, coming up with something new?" asked Friend.

 

"What about the rediscovery of something old? Can that be creative?"

 

"Yes, I suppose it can - if it displaces the current."

 

"So creativity is a war on the current?"

 

"That seems to be a fair definition."

 

"So conservatives are never, by definition, creative?"

 

"I don't know about that. Maybe they are creative within a set of conservative bounds."

 

"Maybe there are particular things the conservative leaders want changed, and they employ the creative to find ways to do so."

 

"Yes, perhaps the creative rediscover old things, which are legitimate by virtue of being old, and find ways for them to replace the current 'old'."

 

"So do the terms 'conservative', 'progressive', and so on just stand for various methods of justifying and then implementing change?"

 

"Not if there actually is, for the most part, no change in the regimes."

 

"What is the most basic change in any regime?"

 

"I would say it's the distribution of wealth."

 

"Really? You don't want to say it is the distribution of political power?"

 

"Political power and wealth are closely linked, if not the same."

 

"How does the distribution of wealth change?”

-------

Nick Pappas, pappasnick.typepad.com 

Expertise - section 7

 

7

 

"But communism really runs on central planning, right?" asked Director.

 

"Yes, that too."

 

"How about capitalism?"

 

"The idea is that there is little to no central planning."

 

"Socialism falls somewhere between?"

 

"I think it's fair to say that."

 

"And that's, roughly speaking, the gamut of first world regimes today?"

 

"I feel, for some reason, that we should count liberal democracy as a separate regime."

 

"Okay. Where is expertise most at home?"

 

"Any answer here is controversial. I'll say liberal democracy."

 

"Because capitalism alone is not enough to encourage expertise?"

 

"Yes, monopolies can stifle competition which stifles the creative use of expertise."

 

"Ah, there are different uses of expertise?"

 

"Certainly."

 

"What is the 'creative' use of expertise?"

 

"The development of new technology or new technique."

 

"Does creativity necessarily involve the creation of something new?"

-------

Nick Pappas, pappasnick.typepad.com 

Expertise - section 6

 

6

 

"None that I'm aware of," said Friend.

 

"Why do you think that is?"

 

"Modern science and its technology is how regimes compete today - the field on which they play, though very rarely in the sense of frolic."

 

"And it is how people within regimes compete with one another?"

 

"Yes. That's the thing. There was less intra-regime competition in ancient times."

 

"Less intra-regime commerce?"

 

"Yes, the commerce and the technology go hand in hand."

 

"Can you have much commerce without technology?"

 

"Not anywhere near as much - orders of magnitude of difference."

 

"Can you have much technology without commerce?"

 

"You know, maybe. I think it would have to be driven by the leaders of the regime."

 

"Would it be as effective without being wed to commerce?"

 

"No, I don't think so. There are regimes that have tried that, communist regimes."

 

"And the other regimes, the dominant regimes, are called capitalist, yes?"

 

"Yes."

 

"Capitalism runs on expertise, in practice. Communism runs on... what?"

 

"Expertise, too - in theory."

-------

Nick Pappas, pappasnick.typepad.com 

Expertise - section 5

 

5

 

"What is 'the political'," asked Director, "and why does it matter in a conversation about expertise?"

 

"The political is more than that half of the state / society distinction we're used to. The political is all of it - the whole regime, the entire way of life. Can we agree to that?"

 

"Yes. But what are we to make of a 'progressive' regime, a progressive way of life? Can it be a conservative progressive regime to the extent it maintains itself in its essential character?"

 

"You mean to say that a progressive regime that lasts a thousand years true to its character is conservative."

 

"Isn't it?"

 

"Yes, I'd say it is. If it conserves its fundamental principles, it's conservative."

 

"And all regimes attempt to be conservative."

 

"But not all individuals within a regime want for it to be conserved."

 

"Alright. Now how does this tie in to expertise?"

 

"I guess it has to do with what value the regime places on expertise in general."

 

"Don't all regimes need expertise?"

 

"All modern regimes do."

 

"What about ancient regimes?"

 

"They needed craftsmen, but not specialists whose knowledge derives from modern science."

 

"Are there any first-world regimes that do not depend on modern science today?"

-------

Nick Pappas, pappasnick.typepad.com 

Expertise - section 4

 

4

 

"I think," said Friend, "that is what will happen. They'll be brought into the fold, but not given control or the big money."

 

"These old field experts or leaders will be aristocrats of sorts, won't they?"

 

"Yes, but if this aristocracy is based on expertise there will be no inheritance by their children."

 

"Unless those children are passable as experts."

 

"Yes, I guess you're right. Their parents will send them to school to get degrees that say they are experts in the field and that will be that. The old fields are then controlled by a handful of families."

 

"Now, what if someone is exceptionally interested in cultivating his field, optimizing it? Would he overlook his son for an up and comer with greater expertise?"

 

"No, for the most part. He would do as you've suggested - pay the up and comer well and rely on his expertise while making his son some sort of figurehead. It would be rare for a top spot to open to the up and comer."

 

"So if there's no top level opportunity simply for their expertise, what do the ambitious young focus on?"

 

"Politics."

 

"So are we saying there are more politics in conservative cultures than in progressive cultures?"

 

"I don't know if it's more, Director."

 

"Perhaps politics is a constant in any culture, and it just finds different outlets."

 

"Perhaps. But what do we mean by politics? We're not just talking about 'office politics." I say we speak broadly, not of 'politics', but of 'the political'."

-------

Nick Pappas, pappasnick.typepad.com