Introduction
In the rapidly evolving landscape of intergenerational dynamics, a growing tension has emerged between the technologically adept yet politically inert Millennials and Gen Z, and the politically charged but technologically dump Boomers.
The Generational Schism
The first and foremost manifestation of this generational schism is the contrasting ideologies between the Boomers and the Millennials/Gen Z. The former, often characterized as vehemently political and violent, grapple with the challenges posed by rapid technological advancements. On the flip side, the latter, labeled as tech-savvy and privileged, are criticized for their political naivety and apparent inertia. Gen Z finds itself sandwiched between these two poles, attempting to navigate the turbulent waters without necessarily aligning with either extreme.
A Tale of Two Events
Two recent events have underscored this breakdown between generations. The Mask incident, involving public swearing on advertisers, and Vitalik’s publication of the My techno-optimism article, responding to Marc Andreessen’s manifesto, which, basically, argues “to keep the world roughly the same as today but with less greed and more public healthcare”, serve as examples. The exchange is symbolic of a generational dialogue where each side speaks but fails to truly listen.
Boomers’ Stance and Critique
Contrary to Vitalik’s and other Gen Z figures’ disposition towards public politics, Boomers continue to wield significant influence. Their understanding of power dynamics and their pragmatic approach to politics allows them to navigate the intricate web of global governance effectively. While tech moguls engage in endless discussions, Boomers leverage their understanding of the world’s true power structures.
A fundamental critique of the Boomers lies in their desire to halt progress, seemingly unable to cope with the rapid changes that threaten their established power structures. Their reluctance to embrace technological advancements and evolving societal norms underscores a resistance to change, contributing to the widening generational gap.
Vitalik’s Perspectives
Vitalik, a prominent figure in the tech world, represents the optimism of Millenials. His global influence is undeniable, yet his worldview is simultaneously broad and narrow. While he envisions a unified by a “defensive technologies” World, his focus on a predominantly Western, high-tech community leaves a significant portion of humanity untouched.
Critiquing Vitalik’s Views
The criticism against Vitalik’s views has several dimensions:
- Limited Worldview: Vitalik’s optimistic vision fails to acknowledge the profound cultural, social, and economic differences that exist globally. His theories may resonate with a tech-savvy minority but lack relevance for a substantial majority of the global population.
- Defensive Technologies: The call for defensive technologies, rooted in a fear of violence, neglects the symbiotic relationship between offense and defense. This oversight reflects a failure to recognize the complexities inherent in technological advancements and their potential consequences.
- Political Involvement: Despite significantly improving as a public speaker and media influencer since 2014, Vitalik remains light-years distant from the realities of global politics. His disregard for the crucial role of “down to earth”, often uneducated and brutal politicians, which he thinks might be stopped by “good technologies”, suggests a lack of maturity, a characteristic that may impede his ability to effect real change.
- Timing Issue: Vitalik’s defensive technological gradualism requires a lot of time to reverberate through society in all countries and to lead to real improvements on social and economic levels of a broader society. Simultaneously, with Boomers’ increasing stubbornness and their aggressive wrong-decision-making, we are all running out of time very quickly.
A Proposal for Change
In response to the perceived shortcomings of Vitalik’s proposal, we advocate for a direct, “real-politic” approach. Rather than adhering to a naïve and utopian ideal, the proposal suggests actively engaging in local politics by not only developing methodologies, platforms, and applications that facilitate the spread of horizontal governance systems beyond the confines of the crypto/blockchain enthusiast community but also by establishing formal political parties to represent the interests of the technological and entrepreneurial community at both the local and federal levels.
Essentially, we need to cultivate a much more active involvement of so-called ‘technological leaders’ in actual political campaigns. Furthermore, we need someone to boldly challenge the existing political systems by presenting to the world’s population (particularly the 150 million displaced people) the first independent techno-libertarian country, as a more practical addition to the elite-orientated project of propelling selected few, who disagrees with the current state of the world, to Mars.
Evernomics — Digital Wealth Growth Intellectual Contracts Platform — is your way to invest into your future without hassle.
For more on Evernomics: https://evernomics.com/