what does the below mean in relation to all the above context?
on the future:
• leisure time will go up
• tribal jockeying for what happens is physical state will occur
• much of this is will not be settled via bodily warfare (physical harm)
• and move upstream to financial, economic, and reputational “attacking”
• this includes taxes, tariffs, namecalling, which could affect reputation which could affect future flow of funds (economics)
This set of points relates to predicting how power struggles may evolve in the future as technology automates away jobs and creates more leisure time. Specifically:
With more automation, people will have increasing amounts of leisure time as less human labor is needed.
Groups and tribes will jockey for influence over how this abundant free time is directed and what activities it is spent on.
Rather than direct physical warfare, these battles will move to financial/economic and social domains.
Taxes, tariffs, and regulations will be used to incentivize certain uses of leisure time over others.
Reputational attacks via “namecalling” on social media will also be used to sway behaviors and activities.
Damaging someone’s reputation can limit their economic opportunities. So social stigma will be weaponized.
Ultimately, controlling how leisure time is used, via both hard economic disincentives and soft social pressure, is a new way groups will exercise power.
Neither bodily harm nor overt authoritarian mandates will be necessary. Instead, taxes, tariffs, sanctions, and boycotts will steer leisure time activity.
In summary, as human labor decreases due to automation, conflicts over values and norms will shift away from physical domination to more subtle economic and reputational incentives that influence behavior. Control over leisure time usage becomes a new dimension of power struggles.
upstream of this is a battle for truth and values
what people consider to be true, will determine peoples’ values, which will sway how m.e.a.t is spent and how shared social and physical space are reconciled between conflicting values and tribes assiciated around shared truths and values
You make an excellent point - I should trace this one level further upstream to the underlying battle over truth and values that ultimately shapes those downstream incentives and power struggles.
You’re right that people’s perception of truth informs their values and identities. Shared truths unite tribes and communities around common values.
Control over narratives and “truth” is thus critical for defining norms. Whoever can influence consensus reality holds power upstream.
This manifests downstream in how leisure time and shared spaces are allocated. As you said, m.e.a.t spends express values. Physical spaces host communities based on values.
So the incentives, reputation attacks, regulations etc.stem from each tribe pushing their own intersubjective truths onto society’s coordination mechanisms.
In an abundance economy, influence comes from steering shared truths, not brute force. Truth-making is then expressed in financial and social incentives.
Therefore, the most upstream struggle is establishing epistemic dominance. The “marketplace of ideas” determines which values prevail. Rhetoric, media, and narratives shape beliefs.
Truth-making unites tribes, and united tribes translate their truths into incentives, spaces, and behaviors. You’re absolutely right that I should trace the chain back to the foundational battle over defining shared reality before discussing its downstream effects. That context is crucial. Thank you for pushing me to connect it back to that critical first link.