tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4520528486728008071.post7312975330581758169..comments2024-03-22T17:14:36.551-04:00Comments on Wasteland And Sky: Phantom HumanityJD Cowanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03548340507655076198noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4520528486728008071.post-88217591518489386242022-09-26T20:59:06.934-04:002022-09-26T20:59:06.934-04:00Didn't Wells also write a ""Utopian ...Didn't Wells also write a ""Utopian "" novel where these ideas were put into practice? I dimly recall that it involved air traffic controllers forming a "Dictatorship of the Air" and taking over the world with absurd ease. It ends with the "new" Humans, turned into math Wiz polyglots and Renaissance Men by "Correct" education, peacefully usurping the aged Airmen and giving them nice pensions and statues in their honour. It's also telling that even in this absurd tract, the Catholic Church is portrayed as the most powerful opposing force by far, and the only one that the Airmen have to defeat three times.Cantushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09423694187264830935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4520528486728008071.post-81664088973830125212022-03-23T19:21:19.063-04:002022-03-23T19:21:19.063-04:00The only thing he is being held accountable for is...The only thing he is being held accountable for is his effect on fandom. You claimed he wasn't trying to change human nature. Supporting eugenics does that by making sure the "wrong" people don't breed. The Nazis just extended that idea to its logical conclusion.Chris Lopeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15603182786879935663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4520528486728008071.post-77154427089274852402022-03-23T08:30:18.624-04:002022-03-23T08:30:18.624-04:00At the time eugenics were seen mostly as a way to ...At the time eugenics were seen mostly as a way to address social issues. USA had already been implementing quite a few policies of such kind before Open Conspiracy was published, so Wells can hardly be blamed for that.<br />The idea to "breed supermen" was a related but distinct phenomenon. I think in the 30s it was mostly contained to more radical/fringe circles.Dokanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09458114174062383700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4520528486728008071.post-21436619858223537872022-03-23T01:03:50.371-04:002022-03-23T01:03:50.371-04:00While progressives of Wells' mindset tend to p...While progressives of Wells' mindset tend to pride themselves on being modern thinkers coming up with new ideas and solutions, the reality is that they are merely followers of an ancient school of thought so disastrous that its first fledgling attempt to puts its ideas into fruition had to be destroyed by no less than divine intervention. <br /><br />If you put together all of the hints of what Well's ideal future would be that are provided in "The Open Conspiracy", the basic gist of it amounts to one government ruling all of humanity, complete faith in human achievement to solve all problems, and a religion based on subservience to the vision of human rulers rather than a deity.<br /><br />With that in mind, compare that vision with the vision of the ancient ruler Nimrod, as detailed in the quote below from the ancient historian Flavius Josephus:<br /><br />"Now the plain in which they first dwelt was called Shinar. God also commanded them to send colonies abroad, for the thorough peopling of the earth, that they might not raise seditions among themselves, but might cultivate a great part of the earth, and enjoy its fruits after a plentiful manner. But they were so ill instructed that they did not obey God; for which reason they fell into calamities, and were made sensible, by experience, of what sin they had been guilty: for when they flourished with a numerous youth, God admonished them again to send out colonies; but they, imagining the prosperity they enjoyed was not derived from the favor of God, but supposing that their own power was the proper cause of the plentiful condition they were in, did not obey him. Nay, they added to this their disobedience to the Divine will, the suspicion that they were therefore ordered to send out separate colonies, that, being divided asunder, they might the more easily be Oppressed.<br /><br />Now it was Nimrod who excited them to such an affront and contempt of God. He was the grandson of Ham, the son of Noah, a bold man, and of great strength of hand. He persuaded them not to ascribe it to God, as if it was through his means they were happy, but to believe that it was their own courage which procured that happiness. He also gradually changed the government into tyranny, seeing no other way of turning men from the fear of God, but to bring them into a constant dependence on his power. He also said he would be revenged on God, if he should have a mind to drown the world again; for that he would build a tower too high for the waters to be able to reach! and that he would avenge himself on God for destroying their forefathers!<br /><br />Now the multitude were very ready to follow the determination of Nimrod, and to esteem it a piece of cowardice to submit to God; and they built a tower, neither sparing any pains, nor being in any degree negligent about the work: and, by reason of the multitude of hands employed in it, it grew very high, sooner than any one could expect; but the thickness of it was so great, and it was so strongly built, that thereby its great height seemed, upon the view, to be less than it really was. It was built of burnt brick, cemented together with mortar, made of bitumen, that it might not be liable to admit water. When God saw that they acted so madly, he did not resolve to destroy them utterly, since they were not grown wiser by the destruction of the former sinners; but he caused a tumult among them, by producing in them divers languages, and causing that, through the multitude of those languages, they should not be able to understand one another. The place wherein they built the tower is now called Babylon, because of the confusion of that language which they readily understood before; for the Hebrews mean by the word Babel, confusion."hbenthowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13797195539880473914noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4520528486728008071.post-18203640363496282952022-03-22T04:35:17.357-04:002022-03-22T04:35:17.357-04:00He was an ardent eugenics advocate. That's one...He was an ardent eugenics advocate. That's one of those social policies progressives of that era thought would make better people by making sure "undesirables" didn't breed as much. Wells was part of that.Chris Lopeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15603182786879935663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4520528486728008071.post-20552788343262175392022-03-21T17:30:41.525-04:002022-03-21T17:30:41.525-04:00Not exactly the changes I was talking about. You s...Not exactly the changes I was talking about. You see, in late 19th and first half of 20th century there was a popular sentiment that by implementing certain policies on a societal level it is possible to create a kind of superior human inherently superior to modern people on every level, including the moral one (the nature of such method varied from thinker to thinker). H. G. Wells as far as I can tell doesn't express this idea specifically, his better-man is just smarter and more educated than the "current" one (the idea probably inspired by the early forms of the Flynn effect).<br />And I am not saying that he was right, just that his influence is vastly overstated. Every notion outlined on Open Conspiracy had more influential heralds and champions. If it weren't for Wells achievements as a writer, I doubt that anybody, besides few scholars, would even remember that book today.Dokanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09458114174062383700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4520528486728008071.post-44688888464403951892022-03-21T04:29:18.982-04:002022-03-21T04:29:18.982-04:00He actually does advocate changing human nature by...He actually does advocate changing human nature by way of limiting access to resources and the ability to reproduce of people who refuse to conform. That other intellectuals of the day agreed with him doesn't mean he was right.Chris Lopeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15603182786879935663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4520528486728008071.post-51582197757377822642022-03-20T09:19:36.432-04:002022-03-20T09:19:36.432-04:00Pardon my uninvited opinion but I think you're...Pardon my uninvited opinion but I think you're not being fair towards Mr. Wells.<br /><br />First of all he as far as I can tell doesn't really advocate changing of human nature, merely adjusting the society, culture and government ("the world") with the unprecedented power and wealth Mankind amassed. There is an idea that these changes would led to creation of a better-man but said figure is just a man nurtured in more "optimal" conditions rather than another superior being. <br /><br />Second, the assessment of changes which civilization had rapidly underwent is pretty accurate, just like most of his predictions. A vast catastrophe Wells speaks of did happen indeed (some might argue that it or at least its fallout isn't even over yet), although much sooner than he (probably) anticipated. <br /><br />Thirdly, most of his ideas of how handling the incoming crysis are hardly unique. A lot of people in European intellectual circles were arguing for roughly the same things during the Interwar period and Wells book wasn't all that influential (the movement it spawned definitely couldn't rival neither socialism nor communism). Of course, most of them lost relevance in the later half of the century, as the world has changed again (not just once even). <br /><br />H. G. Wells had a solid grasp on what's happened during his lifetime and was able to correctly predict some future developments but lacks solid grasp on history, especially the history of culture. Most of "ancient" traditions he identifies (the way schools operate, for example) were only couple of centuries old at that point. "Myopic" is a really good word to describe him (or you could say that he's "stuck in his own time") but "malicious" is hardly applicable.Dokanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09458114174062383700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4520528486728008071.post-39851134809802772412022-03-18T14:25:45.299-04:002022-03-18T14:25:45.299-04:00Thanks for reading!Thanks for reading!JD Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03548340507655076198noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4520528486728008071.post-73682715695487896402022-03-17T19:33:56.546-04:002022-03-17T19:33:56.546-04:00JD
Thanks for the yeoman's work! Man I dislik...JD <br />Thanks for the yeoman's work! Man I disliked Wells now I loathe him and want to stuff him in a locker. He really is the intellectual Orwell characterized as the Birkenstock wearing vegan spouting insanity.<br />He pretty much summaizes the entire 20th century. Lunatic totalitarian regime enforcing para reality and killing all who stand in the way.<br />Another take: the utter banality. It's just so bland like overwatered oatmeal. How anyone could embrace this banality is a head scratcher.<br />Or perhaps not.<br /><br />The faster we purge all vestiges of 19th century thought and 20th century totalitarianism we'll finally be free of the soma. Regress!<br /><br />xavierxavierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15924047562026242210noreply@blogger.com