Start a foundation which would support the teaching of fundamentalist religious science far beyond the confines of religious schools. So create I would seek out brilliant but deluded “values” supporting people and point out how this would reach far more people than they could ever reach by participating only within declared religious institutions. I would include teaching communist and anarchist “theories” of economics, especially including teaching that all successful corporations and the people who help them succeed are greedy and evil. I would set the foundation up so that it would be a pure meritocracy with fantastic status rewards for very capable and very intelligent proponents of the ludicrous crypto-religious positions I was advocating. I would concentrate the foundation in the newly developing countries where the cost of pulling capable of people in to my endeavour would be relatively low, and the impact of doing so would be relatively high, for example I would certainly wish to revive religious feelings in India in such a way to encourage governments go unliberalize their freeer market laws and to encourage intelligent kids from somewhat traditionally religious families to particpate in a resurgence of their traditional religions, especially their teachings against science and efficient economies.
Its possible we might identify some organizations that are already doing this with great energy and talent, in which case I would encourage joining forces with these organizations, possibly giving direct resource help.
Your proposal has a lot to like. It takes EA principles of targeting developing nations where costs are lower and your own infrastructure can, relatively, go further, as well as a focus on anti-development and un-education. We can also see that similar work has been tremendously effective, for instance, in making Uganda a hotbed of homophobia.
But at the same time I worry you’re getting into a crowded market and also overestimating how far your budget will take you. Even in developing areas, establishing a school is not cheap or easy. And your plan of running your organization with fabulous meritocratic rewards is sure to ad to this. The incoherence of your curriculum is another issue that could prevent it from drawing the support you’d need for the long-term. Plus, so many other ideologies are competing in the same fertile grounds you hope to enter.
And of course, if the right/wrong people get into your movement, it could all backfire. Think of the Mormons—an insular, highly-fundamentalist sect who originally lived with in borderline socialism, with some disturbing teachings in their past (and one’s most people here strongly disagree with still today), but their legacy in today’s Utah is largely positive, and many members are highly successful as individuals and as contributors to larger society.
I still think your plan is one of the worse ones here. Well done!
But at the same time I worry you’re getting into a crowded market and also overestimating how far your budget will take you.
I suspect the constraint of proposing something that is legal will result in all the effectively bad ideas being some version of something somebody out there is already doing. But I would love to be proved wrong by a genuinely novel, legal, and effective bad suggestion.
Start a foundation which would support the teaching of fundamentalist religious science far beyond the confines of religious schools. So create I would seek out brilliant but deluded “values” supporting people and point out how this would reach far more people than they could ever reach by participating only within declared religious institutions. I would include teaching communist and anarchist “theories” of economics, especially including teaching that all successful corporations and the people who help them succeed are greedy and evil. I would set the foundation up so that it would be a pure meritocracy with fantastic status rewards for very capable and very intelligent proponents of the ludicrous crypto-religious positions I was advocating. I would concentrate the foundation in the newly developing countries where the cost of pulling capable of people in to my endeavour would be relatively low, and the impact of doing so would be relatively high, for example I would certainly wish to revive religious feelings in India in such a way to encourage governments go unliberalize their freeer market laws and to encourage intelligent kids from somewhat traditionally religious families to particpate in a resurgence of their traditional religions, especially their teachings against science and efficient economies.
Its possible we might identify some organizations that are already doing this with great energy and talent, in which case I would encourage joining forces with these organizations, possibly giving direct resource help.
Your proposal has a lot to like. It takes EA principles of targeting developing nations where costs are lower and your own infrastructure can, relatively, go further, as well as a focus on anti-development and un-education. We can also see that similar work has been tremendously effective, for instance, in making Uganda a hotbed of homophobia.
But at the same time I worry you’re getting into a crowded market and also overestimating how far your budget will take you. Even in developing areas, establishing a school is not cheap or easy. And your plan of running your organization with fabulous meritocratic rewards is sure to ad to this. The incoherence of your curriculum is another issue that could prevent it from drawing the support you’d need for the long-term. Plus, so many other ideologies are competing in the same fertile grounds you hope to enter.
And of course, if the right/wrong people get into your movement, it could all backfire. Think of the Mormons—an insular, highly-fundamentalist sect who originally lived with in borderline socialism, with some disturbing teachings in their past (and one’s most people here strongly disagree with still today), but their legacy in today’s Utah is largely positive, and many members are highly successful as individuals and as contributors to larger society.
I still think your plan is one of the worse ones here. Well done!
I suspect the constraint of proposing something that is legal will result in all the effectively bad ideas being some version of something somebody out there is already doing. But I would love to be proved wrong by a genuinely novel, legal, and effective bad suggestion.