Is he watching it is he? Wouldn't think it was his cup of tea at all
is alan moore unable to access bbc iplayer for some reason?Curtis is friends with Alan Moore, the former comic-book writer, who lives in Northampton, in the East Midlands. (Moore, who describes himself as an anarchist, wrote “V for Vendetta,” “From Hell,” and “Watchmen,” but he has since disassociated himself from the industry.) During Britain’s first coronavirus lockdown, Curtis sent Moore and his wife, Melinda Gebbie, a thumb drive loaded with all his films. Watching Curtis’s back catalogue put Moore into a state that he likened to a lucid dream. “We tend as individuals to acquire a massive image bank, a massive archive of experiences and things that we’ve seen, and so the archives that Adam has access to, that’s almost like our collective cultural memory,” he said. “And, by juxtaposing those images, one with another, he makes these startling convergences of meaning, exactly like a dream does—where you perhaps don’t understand it all on first experience but where it is haunting.” Moore told me that he felt “quite neurologically fizzy” after each film. At the end of the binge-watch, he sent Curtis a postcard, comparing his work to “the kind of dream where we become aware that we are dreaming and can thus attain agency over the torrent of nonsense.”
"what if meritocracy is bad?The new one's about the failures of individualism, yeah?
There've been a ton of "what if meritocracy is bad?" takes lately too. I'm in full support of people re-investigating bedrock principles of our society every time we hit a crisis. The world changes. Rules get established and people forget why they exist. Chesterton's fence: you better damn well figure out why something exists before you tear it down.
Still, in trying to envision these alternate worlds, you have a local vs global maxima problem though that is really really hard to make heads or tails on. You have to suspend too many givens from your assumption frame, you have to entertain too many complex hypotheticals.
At the end of the day, actual social experimentation (including scaling problems) are the only way to actually figure out whether these bedrock principles or good or bad. And at the end of the day, you don't wanna fuck around on master.
This is why seasteading and other exit-voice-loyalty libertarian dreams are Actually Good. The USA used to and still sorta does have the "states are the laboratory of democracy" mindset—The Fed's way bigger and stronger than in Ye Olde Days, but recent innovations from the states lab include gay marriage and cannabis legalization. You try it locally, and if it works, other states can freely adopt it. Top-down imposition, so that the entire country fails as some poorly laid plan is implemented nationally, not so hot.
I've heard arguments that in a big population, you have people who flourish and prefer liberal, consequentialist, individualist, consent-based moral regimes, and people who flourish and prefer societies with more deontological and traditional ethics, with operationalized disgust & sacredness, etc. If you're not gonna get all dogmatic on this carving, and claim your preferred social model is Just Objectively The Best One For Everyone, this seems like a pretty reasonable idea. It does run into invisible veil problems though—genetics isn't destiny, and you'll have offspring in one society that would do better in another