Paul Mason and Jesse Norman on a Revolutionary Defence of Humanity

"智力平方"播客的一集节目，内容是记者兼作家保罗·梅森与保守党议员杰西·诺曼围绕梅森的著作《清澈明亮的未来：对人类的激进捍卫》展开的对话。 讨论深入探讨了西方社会面临的危机、算法控制的威胁以及在 21 世纪重新评估人文主义的必要性。 梅森认为，西方社会正在与一种不再惠及大多数人的经济体系作斗争，这导致民主共识的下降以及对普遍人权信念的削弱。 更重要的是，算法控制的威胁日益增长，诸如人工智能和大数据等强大的技术可能被用来操纵人类的思想和行为。 梅森认为，这些挑战源于新自由主义自我的危机，需要从根本上重新审视成为人的意义，以及如何在面对这些威胁时捍卫人类能动性。 诺曼探究了梅森的智力影响，特别是马克思主义。 梅森澄清了他作为马克思主义者的立场，他寻求超越资本主义，并主张长期、逐步地摆脱市场经济。 他强调在面对自主机器、国家和制度时捍卫人类能动性的重要性。 他还强调需要一个与政治项目并行的道德和哲学项目，重点关注社会应该捍卫什么样的人。 诺曼质疑梅森对气候变化的看法，以及左派的立场，挑战了关心脱碳本质上是左翼立场的观点。 他还认为，梅森对文化马克思主义的批判与更广泛的需要相一致，即超越简单的阶级分析，并承认政治光谱两边都可能存在偏执和偏见。 梅森承认了学术界，特别是在人文学科中，反人道主义情绪的抬头，后现代主义和后人类主义的意识形态质疑人类能动性的概念。 他对这些想法可能破坏人权捍卫以及抵抗技术控制形式的能力表示担忧。 他强调了来自新右翼的威胁，他们鼓吹生物等级制立场，并试图使部分人类屈服。 讨论转向了市场和竞争的作用。 梅森主张拆分大型科技垄断企业，以鼓励创新并瓦解垄断利润。 然而，他也主张采取市场纠正措施来解决寻租行为，批评投机性建筑、化石燃料开采以及像优步这样的剥削性商业模式。 诺曼质疑梅森的反资本主义立场，认为他拆分大型科技公司的提议实际上符合亲市场原则。 梅森澄清说，他的最终目标是完全超越基于市场的经济，转而支持基于富足、合作社、互助组织和普遍基本服务的体系。 他认为信息技术使乌托邦社会主义成为可能。 本集节目以梅森的声明结束，他提到了气候变化的威胁，他希望看到的激进脱碳计划，并最终声明马克思仍然具有现实意义。

The Intelligent Squared podcast episode features a conversation between journalist and author Paul Mason and Conservative MP Jesse Norman, centered around Mason's book "Clear Bright Future: A Radical Defense of the Human Being." The discussion delves into the crises facing Western society, the threats of algorithmic control, and the need for a re-evaluation of humanism in the 21st century. Mason argues that Western society is grappling with an economic system that no longer benefits most people, leading to a decline in democratic consent and an erosion of faith in universal human rights. Adding to this is the growing threat of algorithmic control, where powerful technologies like artificial intelligence and big data could be used to manipulate human thought and behavior. Mason believes these challenges stem from a crisis of the neoliberal self, requiring a fundamental re-examination of what it means to be human and how to defend human agency in the face of these threats. Norman probes Mason on his intellectual influences, particularly Marxism. Mason clarifies his position as a Marxist who seeks to transcend capitalism and advocates for a long, gradual move beyond the market economy. He emphasizes the importance of defending human agency in the face of autonomous machines, states, and systems. He also highlights the need for a moral and philosophical project alongside the political one, focusing on the question of what kind of human being society should be defending. Norman questions Mason's views on climate change and the left, challenging the notion that caring about decarbonization is inherently a left-wing position. He also argues that Mason's critique of cultural Marxism aligns with a wider need to move beyond simplistic class analyses and acknowledge the potential for bigotry and prejudice on both sides of the political spectrum. Mason acknowledges the rise of anti-humanist sentiment within academic circles, particularly within the humanities, where postmodernist and posthumanist ideologies question the very concept of human agency. He expresses concern about the potential for these ideas to undermine the defense of human rights and the ability to resist forms of technological control. He highlights the threats from the new right who promote biologically hierarchical positions and seek to subordinate sections of the human race. The discussion moves to the role of markets and competition. Mason advocates for breaking up big tech monopolies to encourage innovation and collapse monopoly profits. However, he also argues for a market-correcting approach to rent-seeking behavior, criticizing speculative building, fossil fuel extraction, and exploitative business models like Uber. Norman challenges Mason's anti-capitalist stance, suggesting that his proposals for breaking up big tech actually align with pro-market principles. Mason clarifies that his ultimate goal is to transcend the market-based economy altogether, favoring a system based on abundance, co-ops, mutuals, and universal basic services. He suggests that information technology makes utopian socialism possible. The episode ends with Mason stating the threat of climate change, the radical decarbonization program he wants to see take place and finally that Marx is still relevant.