General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDoctorow: Technology Should be Used To Create Social Mobility - Not To Spy on Citizens
Guard labor = a very useful distinction
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/29021-technology-should-be-used-to-create-social-mobility-not-to-spy-on-citizens
Spying, especially domestic spying, is an aspect of what the Santa Fe Institute economist Samuel Bowles calls guard labour: work that is done to stabilise property relationships, especially the property belonging to the rich.
The amount a state needs to expend on guard labour is a function of how much legitimacy the state holds in its populations reckoning. A state whose population mainly views the system as fair needs to do less coercion to attain stability. People who believe that they are well-served by the status quo will not work to upset it. States whose populations view the system as illegitimate need to spend more on guard labour.
Its easy to see this at work: Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, China and North Korea spend disproportionate sums on guard labour. Highly redistributive Nordic states with strong labour laws, steeply progressive taxation and tenant protection spend less on guard labour. They attain social stability through the carrot of social programmes, not the stick of guard labour.
In Capital in the 21st Century, Thomas Piketty uses the wealth disparity on the eve of the French Revolution as a touchstone for the moment at which the perception of the states illegitimacy goes to infinity, when even emptying the treasury for guard labour will not keep the guillotine at bay. Piketty is trying to convince global elites (or at least the policymakers beholden to them) that its cheaper to submit to a redistributive 1% annual global wealth tax than it is to buy the guards to sustain our present wealth disparity.
Theres an implied max/min problem here: the intersection of a curve representing the amount of wealth you need to spend on guards to maintain stability in the presence of a widening rich/poor gap and the amount you can save on guards by creating social mobility through education, health, and social welfare is the point at which you should stop paying for cops and start paying for hospitals and schools.
This implies that productivity gains in guard labour will make wider wealth gaps sustainable. When coercion gets cheaper, the point at which it makes economic sense to allow social mobility moves further along the curve. The evidence for this is in the thing mass surveillance does best, which is not catching terrorists, but disrupting legitimate political opposition, from Occupy to the RCMPs classification of anti-petroleum activists as a threat to national security.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)backscatter712
(26,355 posts)He was at AnomalyCon, a steampunk convention in Denver. Got to have a drink with him too!
eridani
(51,907 posts)Even though I'm married and 15 years past menopause, I still want his baby.