The resulting goodness was secondary and structurally undermined by the conditions of its arising
One specific example of this is slavery. The founding of the United States involved a bargain between people who practiced slavery and those who did not. The ensuing deal was unstable and directly undermined the peace of the country. A few generations later it led to the Civil War, the most destructive conflict in the country’s history, from which America has not fully recovered 160+ years later.
The country’s ideological and institutional DNA always included both goodness and horrific wickedness. A patriotic view of its history discusses ways in which the goodness has come to defeat the wickedness; and a patriotic plan for its future requires efforts to continue to do so.
The country’s ideological and institutional DNA always included both goodness and horrific wickedness. A patriotic view of its history discusses ways in which the goodness has come to defeat the wickedness; and a patriotic plan for its future requires efforts to continue to do so.
I feel like that’s literally what I am doing here, though happy to add signposts somewhere if that would help clarify it.
Your post argues that the evils of American history are exceeded by the good parts of American history; that the genocides and tortures and other evils were “worth it” to achieve freedom and prosperity and other good.
But the evils weren’t a price that was paid in exchange for the good.
The evils were a price that was paid to deny, delay, and weaken the good.
Slavery didn’t support American freedom; it opposed freedom — and it prevented the development of human capital in the slaveholding South. (Name one other place or time in history where it was illegal to teach literacy!) The Trail of Tears wasn’t “the dirty work” to accomplish American prosperity; it was a squandering of American honor for nothing; for the sake of hate and destruction. The Ku Klux Klan’s terrorism wasn’t a price we paid to accomplish some later good; it was a deadweight moral loss. The internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII did not, in fact, make the country safer. It did, however, destroy freedom, safety, justice, and wealth for a whole bunch of Americans.
These were not trades; an evil accepted in order to accomplish a greater good. They were evil perpetuating evil; effort expended on behalf of evil and in opposition to the very goods that you praise.
The evils weren’t for a greater good; they were against it. They were not sacrifices paid to make the good possible; they were sacrifices offered to summon up more evil; to resist and oppose the good for as long as possible.
Name one other place or time in history where it was illegal to teach literacy!
Here are 3: - 1700s Ireland, it was illegal for Catholics to operate schools, teach, or send children abroad for education - In Khmer Rouge Cambodia, all of the intelligentsia were executed and schools closed - in Taliban Afghanistan, women have no ability to learn (beyond ~3rd grade, IIRC)
None of which makes the Antebellum South in good company, but I do want to push back on the commonly-held perception that it was uniquely bad; truly there is no new thing under the sun!
But the evils weren’t a price that was paid in exchange for the good.
The evils were a price that was paid to deny, delay, and weaken the good.
Yep, that is not in conflict with what I am saying. Or like, I am saying that really a lot of the evils were just evils, and genuinely corrupting, and quite plausibly you should have spent your time righting them. But that doesn’t mean that it would have been right to stop the whole thing.
(To again make the analogy to my current life choices clear: It is clear to me that people around me are doing, in addition to a bunch of stuff that is clearly good and might give humanity a shot of navigating the next century successfully, a bunch of stuff that is really bad and is against the good and is not intrinsically tied to the good. Should I stay and try to fix it, or should I abandon the project and try to build something new? How much evil should you tolerate in the pursuit of goodness? Clearly it can’t be none!)
Suppose you know that your friend is a brilliant doctor; and also that your friend’s parent brutally abused her throughout her childhood.
A good friend would not say, “The abuse was worth it, because she is a brilliant doctor.”
A good friend might say, instead, “I am glad that she survived the abuse; and that it did not prevent her from achieving greatness.”
It is clear to me that people around me are doing, in addition to a bunch of stuff that is clearly good and might give humanity a shot of navigating the next century successfully, a bunch of stuff that is really bad and is against the good and is not intrinsically tied to the good.
Um … are we talking about capabilities research, or something else?
I mean, if you were to know that a great AI-safety genius was going around committing serious crimes that harm people in the community, then yes, you should be taking steps to stop it and bring them to justice, even if that would impair their AI-safety work.
Um … are we talking about capabilities research, or something else?
We are talking about capabilities research, in part. We are also talking about stuff like FTX and things adjacent to it (of which there has been a good amount in my retelling of this ecosystem!).
I mean, if you were to know that a great AI-safety genius was going around committing serious crimes that harm people in the community, then yes, you should be taking steps to stop it and bring them to justice, even if that would impair their AI-safety work.
I mean, sure, I am probably the last person someone could try to accuse of “not having tried to take steps to bring the relevant people to justice”. But if the “taking people to justice” step isn’t working, then you maybe want to think about quitting.
One specific example of this is slavery. The founding of the United States involved a bargain between people who practiced slavery and those who did not. The ensuing deal was unstable and directly undermined the peace of the country. A few generations later it led to the Civil War, the most destructive conflict in the country’s history, from which America has not fully recovered 160+ years later.
The country’s ideological and institutional DNA always included both goodness and horrific wickedness. A patriotic view of its history discusses ways in which the goodness has come to defeat the wickedness; and a patriotic plan for its future requires efforts to continue to do so.
I feel like that’s literally what I am doing here, though happy to add signposts somewhere if that would help clarify it.
Your post argues that the evils of American history are exceeded by the good parts of American history; that the genocides and tortures and other evils were “worth it” to achieve freedom and prosperity and other good.
But the evils weren’t a price that was paid in exchange for the good.
The evils were a price that was paid to deny, delay, and weaken the good.
Slavery didn’t support American freedom; it opposed freedom — and it prevented the development of human capital in the slaveholding South. (Name one other place or time in history where it was illegal to teach literacy!) The Trail of Tears wasn’t “the dirty work” to accomplish American prosperity; it was a squandering of American honor for nothing; for the sake of hate and destruction. The Ku Klux Klan’s terrorism wasn’t a price we paid to accomplish some later good; it was a deadweight moral loss. The internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII did not, in fact, make the country safer. It did, however, destroy freedom, safety, justice, and wealth for a whole bunch of Americans.
These were not trades; an evil accepted in order to accomplish a greater good. They were evil perpetuating evil; effort expended on behalf of evil and in opposition to the very goods that you praise.
The evils weren’t for a greater good; they were against it. They were not sacrifices paid to make the good possible; they were sacrifices offered to summon up more evil; to resist and oppose the good for as long as possible.
Here are 3:
- 1700s Ireland, it was illegal for Catholics to operate schools, teach, or send children abroad for education
- In Khmer Rouge Cambodia, all of the intelligentsia were executed and schools closed
- in Taliban Afghanistan, women have no ability to learn (beyond ~3rd grade, IIRC)
None of which makes the Antebellum South in good company, but I do want to push back on the commonly-held perception that it was uniquely bad; truly there is no new thing under the sun!
Yep, that is not in conflict with what I am saying. Or like, I am saying that really a lot of the evils were just evils, and genuinely corrupting, and quite plausibly you should have spent your time righting them. But that doesn’t mean that it would have been right to stop the whole thing.
(To again make the analogy to my current life choices clear: It is clear to me that people around me are doing, in addition to a bunch of stuff that is clearly good and might give humanity a shot of navigating the next century successfully, a bunch of stuff that is really bad and is against the good and is not intrinsically tied to the good. Should I stay and try to fix it, or should I abandon the project and try to build something new? How much evil should you tolerate in the pursuit of goodness? Clearly it can’t be none!)
Suppose you know that your friend is a brilliant doctor; and also that your friend’s parent brutally abused her throughout her childhood.
A good friend would not say, “The abuse was worth it, because she is a brilliant doctor.”
A good friend might say, instead, “I am glad that she survived the abuse; and that it did not prevent her from achieving greatness.”
Um … are we talking about capabilities research, or something else?
I mean, if you were to know that a great AI-safety genius was going around committing serious crimes that harm people in the community, then yes, you should be taking steps to stop it and bring them to justice, even if that would impair their AI-safety work.
We are talking about capabilities research, in part. We are also talking about stuff like FTX and things adjacent to it (of which there has been a good amount in my retelling of this ecosystem!).
I mean, sure, I am probably the last person someone could try to accuse of “not having tried to take steps to bring the relevant people to justice”. But if the “taking people to justice” step isn’t working, then you maybe want to think about quitting.
Okay, good. That’s what I thought, I just wanted to make sure I wasn’t making a not-knowing-what-the-conversation-was-really-about error. (“Never give anyone wise advice unless you know exactly what you’re both talking about. Got it.”)