J.D. Moyer

beat maker, sci-fi writer, self-experimenter

Category: Utopian Speculations (Page 1 of 7)

How To Reconcile Gratitude and Ambition (and a pitch for charity:water)

I focus a lot on gratitude. If I don’t, I’m a miserable ass. I’ve written before about how gratitude is my emotional force multiplier.

I have so much to be grateful for. Good health, family, friends, interesting things to do, various artistic and career successes. But if my life sucked (and it has sucked at times), I would try to be grateful, for anything I had. Each working limb and organ. Being a conscious-aware being. Our sun, Earth’s atmosphere.

There’s something exhilarating about extreme gratitude. It’s freeing. No matter how much life beats you down, there you are, feeling pretty good because you’re not six feet under. We all have the right to enjoy life regardless of our circumstances. Practicing gratitude is the means to that end.

It’s not that we can always choose to be happy (at least I can’t). Sometimes the cocktail of hormones, neurotransmitters, and brain architecture that influences consciousness leaves us feeling bleak. But the choice is always there to detach our feelings from our external circumstances, or to reframe our circumstances in such a way that we feel fortunate. That’s what detachment means, in the spiritual sense. Not that you don’t care, but that your internal state becomes independent of your external circumstances. Unhooked. Free-floating. Detached.


I have a strong, well-developed ego. I want things. I have well-defined goals and I work towards them systematically. Why? Partly nature, partly nurture. Mostly, I think, I’ve chosen ambition as a life path. I like the dopamine rush. I like working towards things, the sensation of progress.

At times being ambitious has made me less happy, given me feelings of being less than. It’s an easy trap to fall into, basing your self-worth on what you’ve achieved. Regarding people who have achieved more than you as better, those who have achieved less as worse.

Is it possible to want more while still appreciating what you have, feeling that it’s enough? For me it is, as long as I remember that it’s the pursuit of my goals that makes me feel good, not achieving them (though of course that’s nice too).

I try to center my identity around my values and actions, things that are well within my control. No matter how many goals I achieve, those things won’t change. I am what I commit to, not what I accomplish.

Does being humble and grateful and satisfied with what you already have make you less effective at achieving your goals. Less hungry? I don’t think so. Gratitude and ambition can easily coexist. Listen to the words of Demian Maia before his fight with Carlos Condit. “I am already an accomplished fighter.” “I have plenty of wins.” Determined and confident, but also filled with humility and gratitude and a sense of enough, Maia proceeded to choke out one of the most dangerous men in the world in less than two minutes.

Of course real world achievement is important. It’s how we make positive changes in our lives, families, communities, and societies. But we shouldn’t hold our own happiness hostage to what we manage to get done. Be happy regardless, by appreciating what’s already there.

An Example

Scott Harrison does a good job of being grateful and ambitious at the same time. He’s grateful to all the donors who have supported his personal and organizational goal of bringing clean water to the world’s poorest communities. But he’s ambitious too — he wants to get more monthly donors, expand operations, help more people. I’ve supported charity:water on a monthly basis for years, and I’ll continue to do so. Not only do they dig new wells, but they monitor existing wells, involve the local community, and implement sustainable models. Access to clean water improves health, frees up time for education and earning money (especially for women and girls), and increases basic human dignity.

Please take a few minutes to watch the video below (warning: some of it is hard to watch). If the white savior narrative bothers you (or the clubbing is bad subtext), please ignore both. In real life, charity:water brings clean water to millions of people, in verifiable and sustainable ways. Charity Navigator gives them 4 stars, a 92.5/100 rating. It’s the real deal. Please join me in supporting their work on a monthly basis, at whatever rate you can afford.

And be limitlessly grateful for all the wonderful things in your life and the world, and terrifyingly ambitious about improving those aspects that are less than wonderful.


Why Basic Income Makes Sense in the United States

Basic income, or a citizen stipend, or a technology dividend, or whatever you want to call it, makes sense. Here’s why:

Read More

“First they came for the musicians … “

Yesterday I read a thread on ambient artist Biosphere‘s Facebook page that made me reflect on the ongoing economic revolution centered on replication and automation. Biosphere posts that he is weary of his music being pirated and feels resentful (a natural and understandable sentiment) and is met with a flurry of comments.

Screen Shot 2015-05-06 at 7.02.39 AM

Most of his fans are supportive, but many roll out the same tired arguments attempting to justify their own stealing or somehow blame the artist, including:

Read More

Corporations Have Glass Jaws

Wall Street bankers enjoying the peak of corporatism.

Wall Street bankers enjoying OWS in 2011.

This post is about citizen action, public protest, and being a trim tab. It’s about how the common citizen wields more power than ever before in human history. I’ll get to that. But first I’m going to take a quick look at history from the perspective of the commoner vs. the sociopathic elite.

Five Waves of Coercive Power

One way to look at history is as a series of power struggles between the hoi polloi (the common folk who tend to treat each other decently) and “masters of the universe” powermongers (the far smaller group who tend to be more sociopathic/less empathetic by nature).

The latter group has taken on different manifestations throughout the ages, depending on what kinds of (coercive) power are effective, and who has the subset of skills to accumulate that kind of power.

Warlords, for example, inspire the loyalty of armed strongmen and terrorize the common folk into paralysis and submission.

Somewhat later in history (with much overlap; warlords still exist today), monarchs acquired and hoarded power via feudal rule (with knights and samurai as playground bullies), familial inheritance of gold, land, and title, and to some extent protection of the common folk from barbarian hordes (aka the armies of other monarchs). Some charismatic monarchs inspired romantic loyalty among the commoners (especially if taxes weren’t too high and executions infrequent). Monarch warlords, such as Alexander of Macedon, expanded their territory (and sometimes national borders) in great swaths via epic military campaigns.

Wave three of sociopathic powermongers takes the form of The Church (not the saints and luminaries who have legitimate spiritual awakenings and dedicate their lives to inspiring and helping others, but rather the institutions that ossify philosophy into dogma, punish those who stray from doctrine, suppress knowledge and discovery, and rule by fear). The Catholic Inquisition is the most iconic example of abuse of power by a religious institution, but no religion is exempt. Possessing the official moral high ground is an ideal platform for perpetrating abuse.

Wave four is fascism, which is not a political system but rather a political pathology that occurs when sociopaths within a government consolidate power and attempt to destroy their detractors. The tools of fascism are surveillance (of known enemies, and everybody else to discover unknown enemies), the encouragement of xenophobia, violent suppression of political protests, covert assassinations, and constant war. Fascism can manifest within communist states, democracies, and republics alike (no doubt libertarian or anarchist states could also exhibit fascist tendencies, if such states existed). A total descent into fascism results in a dictatorship (Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, etc.), but “free democratic societies” also oscillate across the fascism spectrum (extreme examples in the United States include McCarthyism, violent suppression of the Civil Rights Movement, covert support of military dictatorships in Central and South America, and NSA surveillance of citizens).

Wave five of power consolidation by the sociopathic elite is corporatocracy, which is not the simple existence of the corporation as a legal business entity, but rather the perversion of the corporate entity into a tool for extracting wealth and labor from the poor, raiding the commons, evading taxation, avoiding personal responsibility for criminal activities, manipulating governments, screwing the consumer, and other shenanigans. Not all corporations do these bad things, and most people who work for corporations are good people. Still, controlling the state via corporate power is the current method of choice for the modern wave of sociopathic elites.

A corporatocracy works in the economic context of capitalism. Picketty points out that unmitigated capitalism is unsustainable, but so is any other form of unchecked power and resource hoarding by the sociopathic elite. The hoi polloi eventually realize what’s going on and claw back most of the power (with institutions like democracy, rule of law, human rights, public services, asset taxation, and distributing power among different branches of government). We’re slower, dumber, and less motivated than the sociopathic elite, but there are far more of us and we work together well once we’ve reached our limit of being abused and exploited.

I think the influence of corporations on government (especially investment banks), at least in the U.S., peaked in 2011. Occupy Wall Street, if it did nothing else, made it clear to the hoi polloi who the elite were (Wall Street investment bankers, mostly). While the investment bankers drank champagne and laughed at the raggedy protestors from their balconies (literally — see image above), OWS paved the way for federal investigation and prosecution of bank fraud, more progressive income and capital gains taxation, and stricter banking regulations.

The Glass-Jawed Enemy

As enemies of the commoners go, corporations-gone-bad are the easiest opponents so far. Compared to standing up to Genghis Khan, the Vikings, The Inquisition, or the Stasi, fighting corporations is easy!

Consumer-facing corporations often go down after one punch. Michael Moore realized this when he pressured Kmart to stop selling ammunition back in 2001, and succeeded.

These days consumer-facing corporations can be swayed with a few letters or tweets. Target recently reversed positions on customers carrying guns into stores, thanks in part to Twitter campaigns like this one. Target wants moms to shop at Target. If moms don’t want guns in Target, Target says no to guns in the store. Squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Corporations that don’t deal directly with consumers, like mining companies and investment banking firms, are less likely to yield to public pressure and social media campaigns. So are companies with their backs against the wall, like SeaWorld (the recent documentary Blackfish clearly demonstrated the horrors of keeping orcas in captivity, but without captive cetaceans SeaWorld has no business). But even in these cases, public (or employee) outcry eventually leads to legal investigations, increased regulations, fines, and audits, which for fraudulent companies leads to bankruptcy and dissolution.

To reiterate, corporations are not the enemy of the people. The corporate entity in the context of well-regulated capitalism is an engine of wealth creation, a golden goose that generates marvelous gadgets, streaming entertainment, cheap energy, the world’s knowledge at our fingertips, and other modern wonders. The enemy are the sociopathic elite who use the corporate entity to steal, exploit, destroy the environment, evade social responsibility, and generally be evil.

Tough and Evil

The non-consumer facing, privately controlled corporation (invulnerable to both shareholder pressure and consumer sentiment) is the strongest haven of the sociopathic elite. In this group we find Bechtel, Koch Industries, and Cargill, corporate actors who seem to openly delight in destroying the environment, exploiting the poor, and endangering the public.

Organized crime syndicates that function like corporations (and in many cases are tightly interwoven with real corporations) also generally don’t care about public opinion and social media.

But even those corporations and corporate fronts must operate within the context of nation states and their legal systems. Despite the Koch war against the minimum wage, the minimum wage is going nowhere but up. Cargill may keep ignoring safety and environmental regulations forever, but they will also keep getting sued and fined.

Why not a “three strikes and you’re out” law for law-breaking corporations? Keeping a corporate charter should be a privilege dependent on good corporate citizenship.

Keep Fighting the Good Fight

The important thing to remember when fighting for justice, the environment, and human rights is that corporations are made up of mostly good people who generally want to keep their jobs, cover their asses, and not work too hard. This makes corporations vulnerable and easy to manipulate (even privately held corporations).

For example, if we, the hoi polloi, make it more difficult for corporations to sell products containing bee-killing neonics than not selling them, the corporations are going to go with the path of least resistance. It’s only a matter of time.

Will the Sociopathic Elite Always Rule the World?

Yes, probably. But this isn’t necessarily bad news.

Even in a free democracy that values human rights, individuals who rate highly for traits like narcissism, self-importance, callous disregard for other people’s feelings, and a desire for power will probably end up in positions wielding political and/or economic power. Who else would want these jobs?

It’s the job of the hoi polloi to make sure that no single position or agency has too much power, and that institutions and entities that are ripe for the abuse (lightly regulated corporations) are constrained by law to protect the environment, worker, community, consumer, and general public, and to play fairly against other market entities.

Corporations won’t always be the preferred tool of the sociopathic elite. Eventually the crackdown on corporate bad behavior will be too wearisome to deal with, and the sociopathic elite will find a new entity or institution to abuse. Personally I think it will probably have to do with the abuse of artificial intelligence and/or cryptography (perhaps the sociopathic elite will use BitCoin or similar to avoid taxation and gain unfair market advantages).

Even if there is a macro trend towards the hoi polloi clawing back power from the sociopathic elite with each wave of coercive power, corporate abuses may still get worse before they get better. The outcome depends on citizen action (voting, letter writing, protests, exerting pressure via social media) and the subsequent reactions by our lawmakers, law enforcement agencies, and courts. The outcome is not written.

So if you witness a corporation behaving badly, do something about it. You may find the fight to be easier than expected.

If you have a story about pushing back against bad corporate behavior, please share below.


Slomo -- click through to watch the documentary.

Slomo — click through to watch the documentary.

Josh Izenberg has made a great documentary about a fascinating man. Watch it … then come back here and share your thoughts if you want.

My own thoughts on Slomo …

Do What You Want To

It’s hard to watch Slomo and not immediately consider what you want to do yourself. Not in a grand, life goal sense, but rather in a day-to-day mundane sense. How do you want to spend days? Slomo wants to skate, so he skates.

I want to read and write, listen to and make music, and play complex immersive games (like Dungeons & Dragons). I want to spend time with my friends and family, and enjoy the good things in life.

What do you want to do?

The Middle Third Of Life

Sometimes I feel that middle third grind. Money comes in, money goes out. People want you to do things (things you’ve agreed to do), but you’re not always in the mood.

There’s a middle way though, between dropping out and grinding away. To walk that path you have to be willing to sometimes put your own priorities ahead of what other people want from you, even if you love those people and want to make them happy. You can’t be a pleaser all the time and still do what you want.

“Not Becoming An Asshole”

It’s a good goal. It’s a good way to evaluate yourself, spiritually. Are you an asshole? Are you kind to other other human beings and animals, most of the time? Or are you so far up your own ass in the pursuit of money, power, and status, that you are in fact an asshole? Or maybe you’re an asshole because you’re tired of shoveling shit, and you need a break.

The easiest way to not be an asshole is do to what you want, more of the time. This will give you a sense of control, and you’ll be happier, and it will be easier to be kind to other human beings because you’ll be in a better mood.

Do You Have to “Escape”?

Maybe you do, maybe you don’t. I don’t know how restrictive your life is. But what would happen if you just started doing what you wanted to, one hour a day? What if you did exactly what you wanted to for two hours a day? Would your friends and family or boss freak out? Would they find that threatening? Maybe they’d be cool with it. Maybe they want you to be happier. Maybe being happier would actually make you more productive and effective and better able to fulfill your responsibilities to your employer/clients/family/friends/country/planet.

Is It Selfish?

Society wouldn’t work if everyone skated the boardwalk all day (you at least need some workers designing and manufacturing rollerblades, right?). But Slomo worked hard for a few decades before dropping out. He chose not to maximize (his earnings, his status, his security). Choosing not to maximize is not selfish. It leaves some work undone for other people to do, and some rewards unclaimed for other people to claim.

Other people might be threatened if you do what you want most of the time. But if they’re smart, they’ll only feel threatened for about ten minutes (when they realize they can do the same).

If everyone in the world spent more time doing what they want and less time grinding, global GDP might drop. On the other hand, with more people dedicating time to rest, relaxation, entertainment, love, creative pursuits, research, exercise, sports, games, tinkering, hobbies, and doing nothing in particular, we’d all be happier, healthier, and the geniuses out there would get more opportunities to create great works of art, invent clever objects and systems, and make brilliant discoveries.

Less maximizing = more optimizing (of human consciousness and potential).

The Inner Ear

Interesting theory about lateral motion. When I produce dance music I move. I know quite a few people whose lives have been transformed by movement (dance, surfing, skating, whatever). Depression gone. Hundreds of pounds lost. That kind of thing. Maybe there’s something to Slomo’s lateral motion theory.

Your thoughts? Please comment below!


A Revolution Is When Fringe Thinking Becomes Common Sense


In this article from The Baffler, anthropologist/author/anarchist David Graeber makes the point that a “successful revolution” has less to do with protestors taking over the government, and more to do with previously fringe/radical ideas becoming common sense, within a short period of time. The article’s powerful closing line:

And the moment any significant number of people simultaneously shake off the shackles that have been placed on that collective imagination, even our most deeply inculcated assumptions about what is and is not politically possible have been known to crumble overnight.

This got me thinking, what was considered fringe thinking ten or twenty years ago, but is currently entering mainstream thought? The following probably seem like common sense/conventional wisdom to a person in their twenties, but anyone holding these ideals in the “greed is good” 80’s was definitely outside of the zeitgeist.

  • gay people should have equal rights
  • intelligent animals (dolphins, whales, elephants, apes) should not be used as slaves or slaughtered for body parts/meat
  • environmental/ecological collapse is possible if our natural environments are treated as economic externalities
  • the national security apparatus has more to do with control of citizens than it does with the protection of citizens
  • food, shelter, healthcare, and education should be basic human rights, and not conditional privileges to be granted based on hard work, morality, cleverness, inborn traits like ethnicity, etc.
  • the value of work should be based on how much it benefits other people and humanity, not on profitability
  • extreme income inequality erodes social trust and pits the poor against the (shrinking) middle class
  • mass incarceration creates more criminals and does not increase public safety in the long run

Attitudes vary by country. The U.S. is fairly enlightened when it comes to gay rights, but is behind on healthcare as a basic right (Obamacare is a small step in the right direction, but saddles middle-class families with unaffordable premiums). In terms of mass incarceration the United States is in a league of its own (not in a good way). Japan is behind on cetacean rights; Thailand is behind on elephant right; China is behind on environmental regulation, and so on. But none of the ideas are “fringe” — Americans who visit England and happen to break a leg are pleasantly surprised when they get no bill for services, and wonder “Why not in the U.S.”?

So what ideas are currently fringe/radical, but might enter the mainstream in ten or twenty or one hundred years? I would suggest the following are plausible:

  • animals with any sort of conscious awareness (insects and some fish probably excepted) should not be used as slaves or slaughtered for body parts/meat
  • depopulation is more of a risk to civilization than overpopulation
  • extra-terrestrial communities (moon base, Mars base, orbiting artificial worlds) should be established as quickly as possible to improve humanity’s survival chances
  • machines that are probably conscious-aware should have legal rights
  • state benefits should not be means-based, but universal (allowing societies to share wealth without violating Murray’s law)

We can see Steven Pinker’s expanding circle of empathy taking humanity to places that seem strange now, but may make perfect sense later.

Of course, even if the long-term trend is towards more cooperation and compassion, short-term collapse and cultural regression is just as likely. Consider the millions of starvation deaths that resulted from the Chinese Cultural Revolution, or the political and economic events (and xenophobic attitudes), that led up to the Holocaust.

Still, there are hopeful ripples in the way human beings are thinking about alternatives to consumer capitalism, which is Graeber’s main topic. Not every detail of the “sharing economy” vision is worked out, but green shoots are visible. Wage slavery and the ruthless exploitation of human labor no longer make sense to most of us. The tide is turning.

Page 1 of 7

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén