⏩ Debating 'progress': A Quick Q&A with … Samuel Matlack of New Atlantis

'Progress talk is having a moment right now . . . But it will inevitably alienate people the more it becomes associated with dehumanizing projects.'

My fellow pro-growth/progress/abundance Up Wingers,

It’s tempting to reduce the progress debate to pioneers vs. luddites, visionaries vs. regressive ideologues. In his article in The New Atlantis, “Why the Progress Debate Goes Nowhere,” Samuel Matlack addresses the complicated gray areas that lie between the most optimistic of techno-optimism and the most trepidatious side of doomerism.

Matlack writes:

These two extremes are at the outer edges of reasonable disagreement. The use of taking them seriously nonetheless is that they help us to see more clearly the rift between two large trends in our culture, and possibly to build a bridge.

By encouraging dialogue across the ideological gap, maybe true progress (the kind that prioritizes civilization, ethics, culture, and the environment) can be made.

Matlack is the managing editor of The New Atlantis.

. . . the word [“progress”] somewhere along the lines stopped working at its most basic level.

1/ How can we effectively promote a pro-progress cultural mythos?

I don’t think we should. If progress were definitionally a good thing, as the word implies, then you’d think we should obviously want to promote it. But the fact that you have to stick “pro-“ in front of it — and “anti-“ for the other side — suggests that the word somewhere along the lines stopped working at its most basic level. I don’t mean to throw up my hands or be relativistic about this. But the progress idea has long had a life of its own, much like “progressive,” and unless we all know what we mean by it — or, if not, are being specific about it — I find the label really quite useless.

One type of cultural investment we ought to make is to tell young people that it’s good and honorable to go into builder-type jobs. I'm not thinking of software developers. I'm thinking of welders, plumbers, electricians, construction workers and so on. There are over seven million open jobs in the country right now, about a tenth of those in construction and manufacturing alone. I don’t know how we’re going to maintain our critical physical infrastructure, much less improve it, without building a culture that makes careers in those fields attractive.

2/ What are the main fears or motivations driving anti-progress thought, and how can we address those?

The loudest promoters of progress struggle to understand what dehumanization is and why anyone would oppose it. You’ll own nothing and be happy. You’ll get to pick the highest-IQ embryo to be your child. “Don’t die” will be your biohacking religion, but there’s a Sarco pod for whenever you’re tired of living. AI will teach your children and do your job. Fully automated luxury communism. All these have gained significant traction in just the last few years. But it’s not a future we should want. Any movement in that direction is not progress, even if it involves big technological developments. And so if we want to salvage the progress idea from these morally bankrupt ambitions, we should fully reject this future and offer a compelling vision to replace it. What most people want is to raise happy families in affordable homes, do meaningful work, worship, break bread with people they love, maybe have a fun side project, and know that their kids will be able to do the same and better. Progress talk is having a moment right now insofar as it persuasively explains why the status quo has stopped delivering a lot of those things. But it will inevitably alienate people the more it becomes associated with dehumanizing projects.