@topynate

Nathan Cook

What happens when Haredi Jews become a majority in Israel?

This is set to happen in the 60s or 70s. On that time scale, my predictions are dominated by global trends in automation, genetic engineering and artificial intelligence. Such trends could easily drive Haredim apart from other Jews; my hope, indeed one of my long-term goals, is that Judaism and Jewishness are binding enough both to support a confederal arrangement with a common defence policy and cooperation in the face of all the weirdness that will be going on in ROW (and Israel too, of course).
I can give a less "zomg singularity" response too. Condition on such technologies having less effect than I anticipate. Then some time before the Haredim attain numerical majority, they could become a very serious drain on public finances. This is because they 1) tend to be significantly less economically productive and 2) exploit what is already a powerful swing vote in the Knesset to obtain gibsmedats.
We will see a situation where either the productive sector of the Israeli economy demands economic disconnection, or where pressure is applied to the Haredim to make themselves less dependent on state largesse. They're quite capable of doing so; a couple of years in the army seems to go a long way in integrating the average Haredi boy (Haredi girls almost never serve; on the other hand, they get a better secular education). Bear in mind that the Haredim cannot *force* anything, even as a majority, without themselves becoming as capable as the seculars.
The deciding factor between these two options is probably regional politics. The Islamic threat pushes us together, making us less willing to contemplate confederation (which would be my preferred outcome). Thus, we'll see the continued growth of Religious Zionism; settlements will grow, more and more Haredim will serve in the IDF, Arab residents – and citizens – of Israel will be pushed to make formal declarations of allegiance to the state (with predictable consequences), and the liberal internationalist Left will be further marginalised. Palestinians will get roughly the package Bibi is currently offering them, possibly with a couple of land swaps (e.g. the Triangle). The anti-Zionist Haredim will be excluded from political life* even more than they are now. By the time Haredim have a majority, secular and 'traditional' Israelis will be much better disposed towards them.
* How this will be effected, I can't say. The largest anti-Zionist Haredi sect in Israel is Edah HaChareidis. This is part of their "anthem":
To the rule of the heretics we are not believers,
We are not believers!
And their laws we do not honour,
we do not honour!
(From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edah_HaChareidis#Anthem)
In practice, their bark is worse than their bite. Nevertheless, this sort of thing is blatantly inimical to any sovereign entity, whether democratic, despotic, monarchical, neocameral...
Liked by: Ellie Kesselman
❤️ Likes
show all
EllieAsksWhy’s Profile Photo

Latest answers from Nathan Cook

What I mean is, do you think it works? Is it a good system for the world? And also, do you practice it?

You certainly can't run a society on it; that's what I was getting at. Between societies a sort of relativism is inevitable, unless you want to spam them with your television programmes, conduct missionary activity, colonise them, force their conversion, kill their males, etc.
The picture that comes to mind when I consider if I practice moral relativism is of my going through life behaving as a modern cultural anthropologist. I don't. Perhaps a 19th century anthropologist.
This doesn't touch even slightly on philosophical arguments about what morality is, but I don't think you were asking about that.

What does "a revisionist reading of history" mean or imply?

I see this question is going round. it can *imply* a lot of things, but it denotes something pretty specific: a view of some events that differs from the commonly accepted one. It can acquire nasty connotations when groups who reject firmly established facts adopt the label for the sake of credibility.
Being a reactionary perforce makes one a revisionist about a great deal of contemporary history -- similarly to how a non-communist living in the U.S.S.R. would have had a revisionist interpretation of a great deal of history, given that the 'accepted view' of any period was a Marxist-Leninist one.

What are your thoughts on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? And which side do you think is more aggressive towards the other?

That's kind of a broad question. I know what side I'm on in a pinch, if it wasn't clear! Anything more specific like the intifadas or 1948, feel free to ask.

http://ask.fm/garrettlgray/answers/136138744911 Can you comment on that?

Garrett and I probably have compatible ontologies (or so it seems to me), but he and I are using different definitions of "free will" and related subjects. For instance, take the sentence "If a person acts with a reason, they were not in control of their actions, which would have been different in different circumstances." My definition of "free will" does not require that an agent's actions be *random*, or that they be *uncaused*. I have no problem whatsoever with attributing free will to agents living in a completely deterministic universe, like the one in Greg Egan's "Permutation City" (a work which I heartily recommend).
Free will, for me, is necessarily something compatible with the common understanding of free will – while at the same time not necessarily compatible with "folk theories" of what the existence of free will entails (like the ability to act independently of any external causative factors). Any definition I adopt, whatever its degree of logical formality, should be a *refinement* of that common understanding.
So how do I define free will? Roughly speaking: an intelligent being, getting information from external and internal sources, processing it, and taking actions based on that processing. Moreover, the greater the degree of self-reflection – that is, the greater the extent to which that being thinks about its own thought processes, and how they relate to its environment and its actions – the more likely an outside observer would be to attribute "free will" to that being.

View more

What do you think the 88 in 1488 actually stands for?

When I was 14 I had an internet girlfriend whose initials were H.H. Coincidence?

Have you read Scott Alexander's Unsong (http://unsongbook.com/chapter-1-dark-satanic-mills/)? What Jewish mythology-inspired fiction do you like?

Yes, I picked that up a week ago and was favourably impressed. Who would have thought all that punning could be used for world-building?
Sticking with Kabbalah for a moment, Foucault's Pendulum by Umberto Eco comes to mind. RIP. Also Neon Genesis Evangelion – which, by the way, uses Jewish esotericism as a bit more than just window dressing. Two of Ted Chiang's short stories, Seventy-Two Letters and Tower of Babel, use Kabbalah and the Biblical mythos*; the former may well have influenced Scott Alexander. There's a poem, Eden Bower, by Dante Gabriel Rossetti that I rather like: http://www.rossettiarchive.org/docs/1-1881.1stedn.rad.html#20-1869.f30 (his illustration is below). 19th century degeneracy is best degeneracy.
* Not "Hell is the Absence of God", though, that's more of an anti-Christian fantasy.

View more

do u think part of why israel might be poorer than it should be is the culture of doing things there? as in lack of organisation, difficult behaviour, lack of care for details, etc.

So we need to define how rich Israel "should" be excluding cultural factors first. I think that Israel is roughly as rich as one would expect, given its ethnic composition and political/military history. Really, cultural factors are a wash*; we're not Anglo-Dutch proddies, but our own way of doing things hardly holds back the smarter fraction of our population. Quite the opposite.
The countries I would count as exceptional are mostly in East Asia. Those growth rates are phenomenal.
*Or perhaps Israeli culture is a good match for the "Jewish nature", whatever that is? I'm not sure.

Language: English