← Gom Jabbar: A Dune Podcast
Gom Jabbar: A Dune Podcast
Interviews with Frank Herbert: "Our society has a tiger by the tail in technology."
01:18:48
Loading summary
Transcript209 lines
- [00:01]
A
Hey, everyone, a quick disclaimer up top before we get into it. Today's episode focuses on a magazine interview with Frank Herbert. And so there's actually no audio of the man himself speaking. That makes it a little bit difficult to make a podcast about it. But we came up with a creative solution. We asked Leo's dad, Mick Wiggins, to read all of Frank's responses from that magazine interview. And so throughout today's episode, you're going to hear Frank's responses read by Leo's dad, who clearly has a voice acting career ahead of him. Get that man out of retirement is all I have to say about that. Thank you so much to Mick for offering his voice talents to us for today's episode, and we hope you enjoy this one. It was a lot of fun to put together.
- [00:48]
B
In 1981, staff writer Pat Stone of Mother Earth News magazine trudged out to a homestead in Port Townsend, Washington to interview a very successful author. Stone couldn't have known it at the time, but the man he sat down to chat with would be remembered as one of the most legendary sci fi writers in Western history. But Stone couldn't even get him to admit he was an author.
- [01:15]
C
Who? Me. A science fiction writer. I've always considered myself to be a yellow journalist. Like the best muckraking yellow journalist at the news media, I ask questions that other people aren't asking and do a lot of investigating into the world around me.
- [01:32]
A
By 1981, Frank Herbert was at the peak of his career. He was an award winning author whose most famous book, Dune, was being adapted into a major Hollywood film. He'd written four Dune books and numerous other sci fi novels and short stories. An outspoken environmentalist and individualist, by this time in his life, Frank and his wife had moved to a plot of land on the Olympic Peninsula. And they weren't just talking the talk, they were walking the walk.
- [01:59]
C
Did you see the solar collector on the side of our house? That's what's heating our home. Bev and I also grow all our own vegetables. And when we moved here eight years ago, I paid $200 to have Pete hauled in by truck and dumped in the stone terraces out back. I also have an attached greenhouse, and for a time I even raised chickens to provide manure for my methane experiments.
- [02:25]
B
Naturally, an interview with an earth friendly DIY magazine meant a lot of Pat Stone's chat with Herbert revolved around his environmentalist views. And the 61 year old yellow journalist definitely hadn't run out of opinions to share.
- [02:40]
C
People keep looking for an absolute final solution, often waiting to use alternative technology until they can build an energy saving house from scratch when there are many intermediate steps available to us. I also feel strongly and act on my feelings that individuals should take their own steps to be more self reliant and to lessen their impact on our environment.
- [03:05]
A
But as often is the case in interviews with Frank Herbert, the conversation trailed off in countless directions as Frank's thoughts jumped from ecology to politics and education and technology, his statements often winding down half a dozen side streets before making it back to the main point.
- [03:23]
C
I don't like governmental helping or any kind of public charity system because I learned early on that our society's institutions often weaken people's self reliance and damage family bonds as well.
- [03:37]
B
Stone wrote that he found the conversation as enjoyable as it was frustrating. According to Stone, Herbert was a man full of energy who laughed often, but obviously relished escaping any attempts to pigeonhole his ideas.
- [03:54]
C
Hold on there. Yes, individuals will lead the way to a techno peasant society, but I've never said that people should strive for absolute self reliance. I think relative freedom from dependency ought to be our goal.
- [04:09]
A
We found this interview to be one of the more fascinating and lesser known pieces of insight into the legendary author's worldviews, views that clearly made their way into Dune. The conversation is full of contradictions and bold assertions, but also some incredibly profound and progressive ideas. One of the most fascinating parts of the interview is when Frank explains his views on our relationship with technology. He explains to Stone the philosophy of techno peasantry, a phrase he coined.
- [04:40]
C
It involves drawing support from technology, but doing so imaginatively. We have to ask the question, what elements of technology should I use and how should I use them? We need to use technology differently so that people can understand their tools and so they can be put back in touch with the natural.
- [05:01]
B
To help explain this concept, Frank launches into a story as he tells it. He once taught a class at the University of Washington about utopias and dystopias. He found himself frustrated that he wasn't able to get his students to overcome their preconceived notions about technology, so he took them camping.
- [05:26]
C
All I told my class was we'll be out in the Olympics for two nights. It's going to rain. Bring your gear, food and paper and pencils for taking notes. I'll meet you at the trail's head.
- [05:39]
A
It was springtime in the Olympics and Frank knew it would be cold and rainy. So he packed his best camping gear, a comfortable sleeping bag, a high quality tent and A pack full of trail food and necessary supplies. His inexperienced students weren't quite as ready for the wilderness. Everything was going according to plan.
- [06:01]
C
We ate and hit the sack, and then the rain came. Well, I was quite dry, comfortable in my tent, but a lot of my students weren't so well prepared. During the night, I heard voices crying, my sleeping bag's all wet, or, God, it's cold. I simply rolled over and went back to sleep.
- [06:36]
B
The next morning, they all ate a miserable breakfast. Then Frank gave his students an assignment. He asked them to get out their notebooks and pretend they were the last survivors after the bomb had dropped. But remember that Frank and these students lived during the Cold War, so the threat of atomic warfare was on everyone's minds. Frank asked them to write about what former technology they'd need in their hypothetical post apocalypse society. And this time, he got through to them.
- [07:09]
C
Well, let me tell you, those cold, wet people who had eaten an inadequate breakfast looked at society's technology a good bit more closely than they had. When sitting in a comfortable university classroom. Students who had been saying things like, oh, sure, I could do without all this stuff began to ask some basic questions and to comprehend that technology isn't bad in and of itself. Everything depends on how you use it.
- [07:42]
A
This story encapsulates so much of the way Frank Herbert saw the world and our place in it. He was a man with strong convictions, a deep thinker who was as skeptical as he was idealistic. So on today's episode, we're going to unpack the wisdom and the blind spots in Frank's views on technology, government, and ecology. This is Interviews with Frank Herbert.
- [08:12]
B
Well, welcome to the show, everyone. Welcome to Interviews with Frank Herbert, the third of them.
- [08:20]
A
That's right. We hope you packed your camping tent, folks. It's gonna get rainy.
- [08:25]
B
It's rainy and wet and cold as always. You know, we've been talking about Dune for five years, almost six years now, and underneath all of it is Frank Herbert. His beliefs, his opinions on things. So to actually go to the source has been deeply insightful the first two times we've done this. And I'm excited today because I think there is quite a bit in this interview that we dug up that I hadn't heard elsewhere and I think can lend some light to this franchise that we love so much.
- [08:57]
A
Yeah, absolutely. And that's always been the goal with these Interviews With Frank Herbert episodes. This series that we've done right is what can we glean from the actual words of Frank Herbert himself? But before we get into it, of course. Folks, let's knock out some quick housekeeping. Starting, of course, with our spoiler warning. Today's episode is mostly about a magazine interview, as you heard in the opening. And it's actually more about big themes and ideas in Frank Herbert's worldview and less about Dune lore. Dune plot. So as far as today is concerned, we will be reading one completely out of context quote from the fourth book, God, Emperor of Dune. But beyond that, there will not be any plot specific spoilers today.
- [09:44]
B
Yeah, you should be safe to listen, but probably better if you've read some of the books so that you know what we're talking about when we're talking about these themes. Now, as always, a huge shout out to our Kwisatz Haderach level patrons, Daniel Dion, Seth Redding, Greer, Brad Hutchins, Roger Young, and Kevin Mahinram. Oh, people, I would interview you over and over again and then I'd write it in a newspaper that would then get put in an archive somewhere and then no one would read it for like 30, 40 years, 50 years. And then some fucking tall nerd who lives in New York would come to California, dig up this and go, oh my God, these five people are so cool.
- [10:29]
A
Good lord, so generous.
- [10:31]
B
That's what I would do.
- [10:32]
A
Yeah, I like it. I like that plan. I think it's good.
- [10:35]
B
Yeah. I'll get started right away.
- [10:39]
A
Thank you folks so much for supporting the show so generously. But of course, as always, our thank yous extend to all of our patrons at every level who do their part to build the foundation upon which this show is run. We cannot thank you enough and we are eternally grateful.
- [10:56]
B
And hey, if you're not currently in a place to be a monthly supporter on Patreon for as little as two to five dollars a month, don't forget, we do have a one time tip link. That link is in the show notes. Check that out. Also, the free way to support us, Just tell a friend about your favorite Dune podcast.
- [11:13]
A
Indeed. Okay, housekeeping out of the way. Here's the game plan for today's episode. Here's how the conversation is going to shake out. We're going to start today by basically laying out Frank Herbert's philosophy of Techno peasantry. That's a term that he coined. Then we're going to break it down a little bit further. We're going to talk about some of the wisdom at the core of this philosophy. Some of the pros here, as well as some of the cons. Some of the ways that Techno Peasantry and Frank's ideas fall short of reality, because I think both are true here, as with all ideas. And then finally, at the end of the episode, we'll wrap up by sharing a little bit of our own perspectives, not only our own thoughts on Techno Peasantry as a philosophical approach to technology, but also in general, how we feel about technology in our own lives as well.
- [12:03]
B
But before we get into that, let's take a quick break. We need to brace ourselves for this long discussion on Techno Peasantry. Don't go anywhere, dear listener. We'll be right back right after this.
- [12:18]
A
Welcome back, folks. Okay, let's dive right in by defining what exactly Frank's philosophy here is what he has dubbed Techno Peasantry in this interview, in this Mother Earth News magazine article, Frank tells Pat Stone, the writer, the reporter who's out here interviewing him, that we, we, as in humanity, need a new way of understanding our technological tools. Because, as he puts it, our society has a tiger by the tail when it comes to technology. As Frank sees it, there's no going back to the quiet, self sufficient life on a farmstead of ages past. Right. We're well past the point where humanity can live like that. Once again, I get the sense that Frank maybe idealizes that a little bit.
- [13:13]
B
Sure.
- [13:14]
A
But the cat's out of the bag, the tiger's by the tail. Whatever phrase you want to use. Technology is here, it's here to stay. And so Frank thinks we need a new way to look at it, a new way to interact with it. And this immediately made me think of a similar line of thought from Leto II in God, Emperor of Dune.
- [13:35]
B
Yeah, yeah.
- [13:36]
A
Leto, at one point in the book, is thinking about armies, and he has this thought in its guts. The army knows it is the sorcerer's apprentice. It unleashes technology, and never again can the magic be stuffed back into the bottle. End quote.
- [13:57]
B
Yeah. That's interesting.
- [13:59]
A
And, you know, I think, like, to put it another way, what Frank slash Leto are basically getting at here, what Frank is telling Pat Stone in the magazine article and what Leto is thinking about is essentially that the genie is out of the bottle when it comes to technology, and there is no turning back the wheel of time. And so arguments that lean more toward the Luddite worldview of technology is bad. We should remove technology. All technology is harmful. That's no longer a valid argument or a valid way for humans to think about technology. We need to find a new way to think about technology and a new way to move forward with it. And that is what Frank Proposes to Pat Stone in the magazine article what he calls techno peasantry.
- [14:49]
B
Yeah, this is where Frank tells Pat Stone about this idea, this techno peasantry. And in short, the idea of techno peasantry is, it is a conscious and selective use of technology. Very intentional, very, very measured, understanding and controlling our tools rather than being controlled by them. Which is of course another theme that is very central to Dune. This is what he says to Pat Stone during the interview.
- [15:18]
C
It involves drawing support from technology, but doing so imaginatively. We have to ask the question, what elements of technology should I use and how should I use them? A peasant knows, you see, when and why to grab a shovel or a hoe. In the same way, we have to think out our own relationship to the complete environment, our own values, technological options, and make decisions consciously.
- [15:44]
A
Okay, bars.
- [15:46]
B
Yeah, bars go off. Frank, get on your little podium. Hell yeah. That is a royal cart looking podium you're on there.
- [15:53]
C
Hello.
- [15:54]
B
And of course this is like a very, like, balanced take on technology that I think still holds a lot of water today. Agreed. Especially given the fact that Frank lived in an era that did not yet have Internet, did not yet have social media or smartphones. Many of the kind of addictive elements that we deal with in the modern day, like this is a philosophy that I really generally think is good.
- [16:20]
A
Same. Well, let's talk about a. Another really important aspect of techno peasantry. I think this is also important to call out. This is part of Frank's philosophy here. It's this problem that Frank calls the light switch society. Essentially this is a society where the average person has no knowledge or connection to the tools that they depend on day in and day out. And the example that Frank gives to Stone in the magazine interview is of a light switch. If a light switch breaks, we now live in a world where most of us have to call an electrician to come check it. Yeah. And to Frank, that's a bit of a red flag. In fact, he tells Stone that when we don't understand the tools that we're using, the tools that we literally depend on, we give up control.
- [17:13]
C
Knowledge has become institutionalized into specialties and individuals have continually less and less power over their lives.
- [17:21]
A
That's the slippery slope of technology that Frank is worried about. And again, I would say that this is a pretty shockingly prescient view of technology from, once again, someone who wasn't alive when, for example, social media was created or when online gambling was created. Like all of these addictive things that have taken our agency away in some ways or are built to take our agency, our time, our attention away. This is essentially what Frank is worried about as well, is when we don't have the knowledge or the know how to control our own tools, they control us. And I actually came across this term in my research. This idea that Frank calls the light switch society today is basically akin to the idea of technological opacity. That's the term that I came across. It's basically the idea that most of us have no clue how our everyday technology works. From smartphones to cars to fucking Samsung smart fridges. How do those things work? Nobody knows, let alone how to fix them. And again, in Frank's view, this is a very dangerous slippery slope that at this point, decades after Frank's life, we have slipped down that is harmful for not only just individual users of that technology, but society at large. Yeah, it creates these invisible and nefarious dependencies with the technology which then strips people's agency away from them and ultimately makes them vulnerable to manipulation and control by the people and corporations who do control these technologies.
- [18:58]
B
Yeah, I mean, another kind of low hanging fruit idea is like the widespread misinformation campaigns that have happened on social media over the last like 10 years. Information warfare, where people are affecting other countries elections through like bot programmed social media posts. And it's easy to joke about like Aunt Gladys who can't tell that like Shrimp Jesus isn't an actual video, that it's like a slop obviously, but you go, oh my God, isn't it amazing those shrimp became Jesus. And it's like, oh, come on. Easy to joke about that. But like, I had a friend, I was on my bachelor trip, my bachelor party, and a friend was like, oh my God, you see that bear jumping on the trampoline? And I was like, yeah, the fake AI video. And he was like, oh, fuck me. He had a job at the Department of Defense at one point. Like we are getting to a point where fake AI shit is so convincing. When we talk about being vulnerable to manipulation, being vulnerable to being swayed one way or another, it's at a new level. So when we're talking about like, oh, it's like manipulation, I think again, you can make fun of like Aunt Gladys who fucking thinks Shrimp Jesus is real. But realistically this is all very dire stuff. And I think this idea of techno peasantry is one way to kind of undermine some of the power that these apps and platforms have.
- [20:30]
A
Yeah, absolutely. Again, as Frank defined it earlier in that quote, a very conscious way, a very deliberate way of using and choosing the technology that we introduce into our lives and into society. There's certainly a lot of attractive and powerful ideas behind Frank's philosophy here. It really feels like this very grounded and measured approach to technology. Almost the antithesis of the infamous Facebook move fast and break things mindset. Right?
- [21:01]
B
Right.
- [21:03]
A
It really is like, no, how about we take it very slow? Yeah. The Tleilaxu mindset.
- [21:08]
B
Chair dogs. Let's do chair dogs.
- [21:10]
A
Everyone's like, no, what if chair and dog. Shall we?
- [21:14]
B
Hey, John, get to work on that. All right. I want to prototype by wunch, right?
- [21:20]
A
The techno peasant would step in and say, no, wait, hold a second.
- [21:24]
C
Pause.
- [21:24]
B
Wait, wait. The chairs are working great.
- [21:26]
A
Why chair plus dog, right? Like, shouldn't we ask that question maybe?
- [21:29]
B
I think dogs are perfect and chairs are pretty great. I mean, what are we doing?
- [21:33]
A
Like, what are we doing? We maybe don't need to do this. It's definitely. Yeah. It feels like the very reasonable approach to technology. And what I especially appreciate about techno peasantry is that it is sort of a middle ground approach, right? It doesn't say you all technology bad, get rid of all technology. Technology evil. Technology is the devil. That is not what Frank is saying. At the same time, Frank is not saying chair plus dog. Frank is not saying move fast, break things. Technology will save us all. Let's go, go, go. It is a much more measured, methodical approach that considers what technology we use and why we use it. The all important why question. But then also speaking of the light switch and the knowledge, how we use it, I really think Frank is proposing something really wonderful here and something that shockingly, is somehow more relevant today than it was when Frank spoke this to Pat Stone for this magazine interview. And what's kind of a bummer is we seem to have slipped down some of the slope that Frank was warning about. Right? Nuance, as far as the Internet and social media is concerned, feels dead, right? Like whenever you go online, it feels like you're either gonna get like, the doomerism AI is gonna take over and kill us all articles, or you get the other side of the coin. These like creepy late stage capitalist visions of a future that is basically a dystopia where remote controlled servant robots are in your home. I don't know if you saw that $20,000 robot.
- [23:08]
B
Holy shit. And on, on level, it's like you're like, oh, okay. I like of being able to say, hey, can the dishes be done? And then someone does the dishes. But then you're like, but also it can't do Any of that. Unless someone remote controls into your house to build the out Bullshit. What a terrible concept. We just want affordable groceries. We don't need goddamn robot slaves. Like, this is. Oh, good lord.
- [23:34]
A
Yeah, but you know, it's like, oh my gosh, these are the two things I'm constantly being fed on the Internet is like it's either all in or all out. And that sort of polarization, that extremism, techno peasantry pushes back against that a little bit, says, hey, there is a middle ground approach to this. We can be nuanced about this. We can have the conversations that are necessary when it comes to technology in our lives.
- [23:59]
B
Yeah. And I will say that where some of this can get a little vague and ungrounded. That's why I appreciate the camping story, because I think in the camping story, it's so much fun. He's forcing his students into this, like, very confronted with the realities of the world mentality. Right when you are wet and cold and you've had a shitty breakfast. That is a point at which the reality of the world is demanding your attention in a very immediate way compared to the sort of, as he says in the interview, the abstract of them in the classroom going, oh, I could be a survivor out in the woods and I don't need all this technology. And it's so easy to say that. And then he's going, okay, now that you've had a chance to sleep in the rain, what technology is important. And they're like fucking space heaters. Like, oh. And he's like, okay, sleeping bags, burritos, I don't even understand that one. But that's why I want them. Yeah, right. It's a radical approach. But ultimately, as he explains as a teacher, that was what it kind of needed to get people connected with what they actually use technology for.
- [25:12]
A
Right. With the camping story, with techno peasantry, Frank is kind of laying out what are actually the tools we need versus the tools that are unnecessary or even the tools that are doing more harm than good, but drive a great profit. You know, like there is a line in the sand to be drawn at some point. And when you are out in the cold, hungry, wet, camping with your teacher, who were there, permission slips for this.
- [25:40]
B
Like, I don't know, 1960s, 1950s maybe.
- [25:45]
A
Try taking your students camping for two days in 2025, folks. I don't think that happens anymore.
- [25:51]
B
No, I don't think it's allowed.
- [25:52]
A
But I really appreciate techno peasantry is also sort of like an anti capitalist approach, approach to technology pushing Back on this consumerist idea of like, we need more tech because we need to optimize more of our lives and our physical features and our health and our homes and our pets have to have like smart collars now so we can track their steps. Like, why, why the fuck do I need to know how many steps my dog took today?
- [26:17]
B
Is that a thing?
- [26:18]
A
That's a real thing. You can get like a Fitbit collar for a dog so that it tracks their steps. All right, I also wanted to share, I brought up health earlier. I think the health industry is a huge space where technology companies are mining every bit of our bodies for money. And I wanted to share this as an example. And it's interesting because I see in the script you put that you had a different experience with the Oura ring. Yeah, I got an Oura ring about it like I don't know, six, eight months ago. Mainly because I just, I'm a terrible sleeper. I have terrible sleeping habits. And then Kyla the dog wakes up at fucking 5:30 every morning. So that means I literally probably get like less than six hours of sleep a night most nights. And I was like, okay, I'm going to like get this ring that I'm supposed to wear when I'm sleeping and when I'm awake like 24 hours a day and it's supposed to tell me stuff and then I'll use that data to optimize my sleep and go to sleep at the right time and blah, blah, blah. And I can pull up the Aura app right now and tell you that I got five hours and 40 minutes of sleep last night because I still. The habit is up to me to change. A ring, a watch, nothing is going to actually make me change the habit. It'll give me more data that I can use. But ultimately like six months later, my sleep is still shit. And all that's really changed is I'm out $300 and my, my shitty sleep is now quantified into pure data that I can look at and go, wow, I slept terribly. That's why I sleep feel terrible today.
- [27:58]
B
Yeah, you get to feel worse with new information. You get to like, whoa, wow, I get to suffer twice. First I am already tired and now the OOR app is like, fuck you, man, you slept terribly and you're bad at life.
- [28:10]
A
So the techno peasant approach would maybe be to say, I don't need a piece of technology to tell me to sleep better. I need to improve my sleep habits and work on me as the human versus just hope the ring will make me sleep better.
- [28:26]
B
Right? No. And I think that's the key. I was going to share that. Yeah. My wife has an Oura ring and really benefited from it. I don't know if she does as much with it these days, but when we were first dating, she was using it to get that same data. And she would take a very, she's very type A. She had a very like, methodical approach to like, okay, I did X, Y and Z before bed. And then what was my sleep score? And then like, incredible.
- [28:50]
A
Yeah.
- [28:50]
B
And so like, we learned at one point we were playing the Hogwarts Legacy game and she had some big boss battle at like 9:40pm and then we were in bed at 10 and she slept like shit. And it was like, okay, so no hyped video game fights half an hour before sleep. Got it, got it, got it. Meanwhile, I'm like, we both did no screens for a couple of weeks of no screens for an hour before sleep. I slept like shit every night. For me, the TikTok scroll is something that puts me into a much more relaxed headspace. Quiet chatter. It's not healthy, probably, but nevertheless, the point here, I think the broader point is that there isn't a one size fits all solution. And that's where the sort of techno peasant approach where you don't go to a peasant and go, you need this shovel. And it's like, I don't fucking. Like I do not actually, as it turns out. I think that is, that's what Frank would advocate for. And I think that's also where it's like, I'm glad you shared this Oura experience, because, yeah, you can have as much data as you want, but if you're not making changes based on that data, or if that data doesn't help you make more conscientious decisions in the future, then it's just numbers that we decide what they mean.
- [30:11]
A
Definitely.
- [30:12]
B
This is also where, getting back to Frank, this is where Frank also clearly viewed our relationship with technology as this kind of interconnected, interwoven with the environment and politics and humanity. And it all like, yeah, technology and our relationship to it is a piece of the whole puzzle. It's not some removed microcosm. It's a piece of the same story that we've been telling this whole time.
- [30:38]
A
Right. That's an important aspect of the techno peasant view.
- [30:42]
B
Yeah, it's interconnected. It's a piece of the whole puzzle. And he explains this to Stone when they're talking about the sci fi genre and stories that other Authors in the field were telling. Here's the quote.
- [30:57]
C
The bulk of science fiction authors are heavily into what I call the technological toy syndrome. Writers and scientists who believe that technology alone can solve problems have fallen to a common scientific fallacy. The belief that science can answer any question in absolute terms and that it's possible to reduce phenomena to one explanation that will operate in a vacuum. That's not the way that universe appears to me.
- [31:25]
B
I appreciate, first of all, that he's qualifying this. That's not how it appears to him. He was like, hey, that's just not how I think things work. Yeah, yeah, appreciate that you're not making any crazy declarations. Nevertheless, the idea that explanations exist in a vacuum, that these things can be taken out of context and still be true. Yeah, that's a great point. And I appreciate the idea of technological toy syndrome because, man, the number of times authors seem to be substituting real human grit and the stories of humanity coming up against these challenges, they substitute that with robo table or lasers and crazy tech and all that stuff. It's like, we don't need that. We just need characters who, like, we relate to. And then they can be using lightsabers if you want. But, like, that's not real. That's not why I'm here.
- [32:20]
A
Yeah, and I really appreciate that Frank is kind of honing in on this idea that everything is affected by everything else. And so this techno peasant approach to technology takes that into account, takes into account how technology interacts with the environment, how technology is created and how that affects the environment, but then also humanity and how politics will inevitably come into play with any new piece of technology that affects society. And in particular, I think politics is one where a lot of Silicon Valley type folks and people who are proponents of tech love to assume that tech is apolitical, which is just not true. Frank wouldn't believe that for one second. So this is another facet of techno peasantry that I really, really, really appreciate. And honestly, it just makes me wonder, gosh, what would a world be like if there were more techno peasants out there? If there were more individuals and lawmakers who were making these conscious, skeptical, measured approaches to tech and how we implement it in our everyday lives? Would we be living in a better world?
- [33:34]
B
Yes.
- [33:34]
A
A world without x.com?
- [33:36]
B
Oh, yeah. Also yes. Yeah, as it turns out. Glad to just give you the answer to that query.
- [33:44]
A
Yeah, yeah, the answer is yes.
- [33:46]
B
Yeah. Well, we are going to keep this conversation going. Talking now about some critiques, but we're going to take a quick break before we do that. So don't go anywhere. When we're back, we're hitting you with the pros and cons list.
- [34:05]
A
All right, folks, welcome back. Let's now transition over to the other side of the coin. Let's try and critique Frank's philosophy of techno peasantry a little bit. Because as it turns out, it is not the silver bullet to humanity's relationship with technology. It is not the end all, be all solution. And there are some notable pitfalls.
- [34:27]
B
To start off, let's look at some of the skepticism that Stone shares with Frank during this conversation. I really appreciate how kind of vocal Stone was in the article.
- [34:40]
C
Yeah.
- [34:40]
A
All throughout.
- [34:41]
B
Sometimes interviewers just kind of disappear into what the person is saying. But it's good. There is value to pushing back sometimes and then to getting that back and forth. Absolutely.
- [34:51]
A
Stone did a great job.
- [34:52]
B
Yeah, agreed. So this is Stone talking about kind of this idealistic vision of society and whether or not it'll come to pass. He says to Frank, you're proposing that people learn to consciously judge what tools they use, to employ technologies that they control and not those that control them, and to evaluate and reevaluate all the ramifications of using each specific technology. Frankly, the thought that humans may someday be able to make so many carefully thought out value decisions has the ring of an idealistic dream. End quote. Okay, Stone, go off Stone bars. Yeah, that's okay.
- [35:37]
A
Our pessimistic king.
- [35:39]
B
Damn that Stone. All right. I mean, listen, this pushback is interesting for a lot of reasons. Beyond the sort of, like, inherent pessimism, the fact that he's going. I don't really think people are going to be able to make that many value decisions. That's not just pessimism. And I think there's some real meat to that pushback.
- [35:59]
A
Right, Agreed. Definitely. And when you really start to think about techno peasantry as we did for this 12 page scripts that we wrote from today's episode.
- [36:09]
B
No kidding.
- [36:11]
A
A couple of flaws do immediately become apparent. Stone clearly catches on to one of them. This idea that not everyone is going to adopt this kind of rigor when it comes to their technological use. Not everyone will have the desire to do that. But even beyond that, when you really dig into what Frank explains as his philosophy of techno peasantry, it becomes clear that it puts great value on the individual choices we make about technology, person to person. And in fact, Frank goes so far as to underplay how larger technological systems create dependencies that not everyone is able to easily opt out of. And that, I think, is something that techno peasantry overlooks. Frank's philosophy overlooks this idea that technology is not the same for everyone. And even if every single person wanted to make the choice to opt out of certain technology that they felt was not appropriate for them, societal consensus doesn't allow for that. Right. Like, if you just don't live in a walkable city, not owning a car is not really a choice you can make. If you for some reason were like, car technology is something I don't want in my life. I hate cars. I'm anti car. It doesn't matter. Because your city is built, your grocery store, your job, your kids, school, anything you would ever need to do to live your life and participate in society would require you to own a car, to get there and do stuff on time. So that choice is made for you. You don't have the option to opt out on that. And so techno peasantry kind of begins to fall apart when you scale it up to that level and it becomes apparent that it only works. The philosophy only works if everyone opts out of a technology all at once, somehow. Or if a government places guardrails on that certain technology and also supports alternatives that are equitable. Right. If you don't want to own a car, that's okay. We have a robust public transit system. You can still get to your grocery store, your kids, school, and your job on time and never own a car. If that doesn't happen, you're fucked. You got to own a car. You don't get to opt out of that. So I think that's. That's a area where techno peasantry begins to show some cracks and begins. Begins to fall apart. And sadly, in the last couple of decades, as we've seen the rise of Silicon Valley and the rise of the tech industry, it's become very clear that lobbying corruption, certainly in this administration, outright bribery, go a long way toward actually convincing a government to give tech companies more power and to kill their competition, to kill alternatives so that you have no choice but to opt into the technology. And this is despite what their constituents may or may not support. Right? Like fuck what the everyday person maybe is supporting.
- [39:16]
B
Yeah.
- [39:17]
A
And so to go back to the genie in the bottle analogy we were using earlier, it truly does feel like in 2025, not only is the genie of technology out of the bottle, the genie is now pissing in the bottle. Because it really does feel like we have spiraled way, way, way beyond the point where even techno peasantry could come in and save Us.
- [39:38]
B
Yeah, It's a very specific image. Genie's like, well, now that we're not using the bottle, we're on a long road trip and I'm not going to pull over. I also wanted to call out. I saw a recent example that really kind of blew my mind. There was research suggesting that manufacturers of commercial milk formula, including Nestle, have been lobbying against or have in the past lobbied against expanding maternity leave benefits. And you're like, why the fuck do they care? Why does Nestle care if you get paid time off? Well, because a mother who would prefer to be breastfeeding may not be able to if she has to go back to work. And so you.
- [40:25]
A
Oh, my.
- [40:27]
B
Maternity leave benefits as bare bones as you can so that more women have to go back to work more quickly and then are dealt with. Well, what's a convenient way to get my kids food figured out? I guess I'll buy some milk formula.
- [40:41]
A
Jesus Christ.
- [40:43]
B
And that sucks.
- [40:46]
A
And that really undermines one of the core philosophies of techno peasantry. Right? Making a conscious choice about technology. We unfortunately live in a world where, like this Nestle example that you're sharing, the choices are made for us through the systems that we are forced to live under and within. So that is a big, big, big area. Where I think Frank's philosophy falls short is that it fails to account for the larger forces and dependencies that the individual person does not have control over. It requires group actions and government intervention.
- [41:28]
B
Yeah, yeah.
- [41:30]
A
To push and shape those forces. And in Frank's ideal world, a techno peasant is making these conscious choices on what technology they may or may not use in their lives. But that is ultimately an individual choice and doesn't affect the production of the technology itself, if that makes sense. Like the example I can think of is in this magazine article. Frank is really excited to show off all of the cool, eco friendly things he's installed in this house to Pat Stone. And he shows off, you know, like, we got solar panels on the roof and it's going to be awesome. And that's great, you know, like, Frank has made the conscious choice to introduce solar panel technology into his home, but that doesn't change how the materials for that panel were extracted, mined, manufactured, shipped around the world and ended up on his house so he could install them on his roof. It doesn't affect that long chain of events that maybe arguably has way more impact on the environment than one person's house switching over to solar friendly energy.
- [42:42]
B
Yeah. Also, Frank, when your solar panel breaks, are you Going to fix it. You're going to fix it, Frank? Or, oh, you have to, like, call a specialist to fix it. Okay, just ask.
- [42:55]
A
That's a good point, too. That's a very, very good point. And you know, of course, I think Frank would push back on me on that criticism and say, well, techno peasantry isn't an individual philosophy. It is on individuals to then influence their communities to adopt techno peasantry, and it's on communities to then influence their states and countries to adopt techno peasantry. It's something that, en masse, as humans, we should all be adopting. And that's cool. I would love to live in that world, but I just don't see a world in which every single person adopts Frank's techno peasant philosophy. And I think in that quote we just read a few minutes ago, Stone very much points it out too. It feels hopelessly idealistic of Frank to think that that world can come about. And it's just hard to believe that individual techno peasantry that you or I decide to take on is a way we can actually change systemic exploitation at a larger global scale.
- [44:02]
B
Yeah, I was also going to say that there's another side of the failure of not accounting for the fact that institutions have so much effect on the way that the world works. Failing to take that into consideration actually also has another problem, which is that it can shift the narrative to that of these widespread problems are the results of your individual failures. If I say this makes me so mad, it's funny because, like, for sure, this is something that I think we've all run into where mom and pop shops, coffee shops, have switched from using plastic straws to using paper straws and you go, cool, cool, cool. But there's still like a million metric tons of plastic entering the ocean every year. The reality of, like saying here is this broad issue, what specifically are you going to do to fix it? And if it doesn't get fixed, that's your fault. Even as the biggest, wealthiest companies are basically doing nothing about it. Basically doing nothing to solve their side of the problem. Yeah, a lot of the kind of existential issues that we're dealing with right now in society have to be addressed at a governmental level in addition to whatever little things that we can do individually. You know, you can choose to fly less, you can use more trains, you can use more public transit, you can individually address your carbon footprint, but there's a point of diminishing returns. And you can't put it all.
- [45:36]
A
There's only so much you can move the needle I could never use another plastic straw for the rest of my life. And some company today, by this afternoon will dump more plastic into the ocean than I probably could for the rest.
- [45:49]
B
Of my life than all of those straws put together. Yeah.
- [45:52]
A
You know, like if the goal is to move the needle, the scale of the thinking has to be bigger. This isn't to like. I don't think either of us are saying grassroots grassroot movements aren't valid. Movements do begin at the local level with individuals, with communities, with groups. But the small scale movement isn't the solution. The solution is this movement then grows into a tidal wave that can influence the larger institutions and the governments and large scale change. I think most movements obviously have that goal ultimately. Yeah. But yeah, it's interesting. I do think like this is another area scale. I think ultimately, I think maybe to like bundle all of this up, all of our critiques of techno peasantry up here, I think it comes down to scale.
- [46:44]
B
Yeah.
- [46:45]
A
Frank is not thinking big enough with techno peasantry beyond hoping that people, enough people adopt it, that it affects change for societies at large. Throughout this interview, actually, Frank strongly criticizes big government. He's very anti big government. He takes a potshot at the welfare system at one point in the interview because he feels that systems like this strip people of their autonomy. Much like technology, big government strips people of their autonomy. That is a worldview that Frank Herbert had. And instead he very much in this interview, advocates for small communities using technology to tackle local issues that affect them directly day in and day out. Here's a quote we wanted to share of him talking about that isolation is.
- [47:33]
C
Not part of my basic philosophy. The point is that we don't necessarily have to be dependent in some of the ways that we've chosen to be. I do though believe that a person's ties should be strongest to his or her local community. We with looser bonds connecting him or her to larger communities.
- [47:54]
B
Yeah.
- [47:55]
A
And again, that's all well and good. Inherently. There is nothing wrong with that philosophy and there are many benefits to that approach. Where again, it begins to fall apart is when mass coordination is actually required and necessary. I don't know, I was having a hard time coming up with an example of this, but I was just trying to think back, sure. To anything that might fall into this category in recent years. And I was thinking like, oh, you know, maybe like a deadly and easily transmissible pathogen that causes entire cities and economies to shut down for weeks and months on, on end until scientific organizations around the world have to Coordinate to create a vaccine so that societies can get back on track. That maybe is an example that.
- [48:45]
B
I don't know. I don't think that would ever happen.
- [48:46]
A
You know, could you. Could you ever imagine something like that happening? Wouldn't that be crazy?
- [48:50]
B
I can't. And honestly, if it did happen, it would probably be your fault. Individually. Yeah, individually.
- [48:56]
A
It's because you didn't use enough paper straws that the pandemic happened, is what we're saying.
- [49:01]
B
That's what. That's what we're saying.
- [49:06]
A
I mean, like, dumb pandemic jokes aside. Yes. There are events, natural events, that happen in our world and in our societies that affect hundreds of millions of people all at once. Your local government is not about to halt a pandemic in its tracks or tackle nuclear proliferation, or even be able to figure out space travel and get humanity beyond the limits of Earth and out into the stars. All of those things require massive institutions with large influence and quite a bit of power to work together and coordinate so that the lives of literally hundreds of millions of people can be ideally better. Does it always play out that way? Of course not. But it is necessary in some instances. And I think Frank's philosophy of techno peasantry really downplays that. Really downplays the need for mass coordination and large institutions to work together on these larger issues that simply can't be handled at the local level.
- [50:21]
B
Yeah. Also, a thought that has been kind of brewing this whole time for me is also changing the nature of what individual action looks like. It's so easy to be like, use fewer straws. But as much as you are correct that the city secretary of Brooklyn County, New York, is not going to solve the debris field around Earth realistically, like local government and local elections and actually putting people in place who have the, you know, who understand what you care about, or, you know, showing up and going to city halls and making sure that your representatives know what matter to you. Like, those are far more impactful than abstaining from the occasional plastic straw, which you then put in the appropriate recycling bin. Very true. And I think that's also something that the big companies and big kind of the evil players that we're sort of whispering about are benefiting from is the belief that what you should do is buy a tote because that's going to be your reusable bag, and that's all you should do. Should you call your representative and make sure that they're clear? No, no, don't do that. Don't know. Sorry, you're Making my life more difficult. Now. You should just buy a new tote bag, maybe with a muay deep mouse on it. From gomjabarshop.com from gomjabarshop.com, my favorite merch site on the website. Yeah, new Gom Jabbar custom plastic straws coming soon. But the. Yeah, it's like individual action and local government, it's a piece of the puzzle, but it does have to be there. And I think that that's another.
- [51:55]
A
That's a really great point, Leo.
- [51:56]
B
Yeah, like scale is so true. And also the way that these organizations are set up, you cannot affect individually the biggest thing. You have to start on the smaller level first and go up the channel. Yeah. And then you said comptroller, and I was like, I only know that word because I just voted.
- [52:20]
A
I just voted yesterday.
- [52:21]
B
Hey, hey, hey. Okay, cool. Well, there you go. Voting in local elections is important, especially because I feel like the whole country is talking about New York's mayoral.
- [52:33]
A
All right, in three, two, one. Say who you voted for.
- [52:36]
B
Three, two, one.
- [52:37]
C
Mom.
- [52:38]
B
Donnie.
- [52:40]
A
What? Curtis Lewa.
- [52:42]
B
I. Wait, I voted Cuomo. Imagine we were both like, yeah, Andrew Cuomo's got the. Fuck that guy. That guy sucks.
- [52:52]
A
Literally, that guy.
- [52:54]
B
Anyway, well, it is so wrapping up the sort of like criticisms of techno peasantry, it is worth recognizing that we are talking about this philosophy that Frank was spitting in his conversation with Stone over 40 years ago. Yes, it is going to be in some ways outdated just by the nature of like, yeah, how often do you dig up a 50 year old conversation and it like rings true 100%, for example. And you brought this up a little bit earlier. Frank simply could not have predicted the cultural shifts brought about by the Internet. I think people were expecting flying cars and shit. And then we have this post physical world where entire industries exist to handle the data surrounding advertising like that. No one, no one in the 60s and 70s could have been like, yeah, there's going to be whole careers. My wife's job as an applied science manager. What does that even mean to someone in the 60s? Right. Many of his ideas about technology were still grounded in the physical world, still grounded in devices like the microwave that you buy or the smart fridge that Samsung sells you. They don't necessarily apply to these algorithmic things.
- [54:20]
A
Right.
- [54:21]
B
It's not about. It's not about physical objects anymore. Now it's this like abstract processing power.
- [54:27]
A
Right. The technology that we face in 2025 is wildly more abstract and impossible to wrap our minds around than Frank Talking about solar panels, you know.
- [54:38]
B
Right. He couldn't have imagined Labubu at any level.
- [54:43]
A
Certainly not.
- [54:45]
B
Labubus defy all of the technopheasmtry. It really falls apart when you get Labubus involved. Yeah, so true, so true. Just drag Frank into a Pop Mart one of these days he loses his mind. But there is a moment in the interview that illustrates this. When Stone observes that power seems to have been consolidating in big businesses and centralized authorities for decades.
- [55:12]
A
I like the Stone guy.
- [55:14]
B
Yeah. Fucking. What novels has he written? I want to read his books. Let's do a book club on Stone's books. But this is. Here is Frank's response to this idea that maybe power is coalescing in a troubling way.
- [55:30]
C
I don't think this has to continue. I feel that as communication systems improve and with the new computers that are continually being developed, communications are coming on like gangbusters. People won't be so dependent on the often one sided reporting of the conventional media for information. Folks will see that we can take control of some of the functions now handled by big government, schools, taxation, whatever, and that the bigger and stronger is always more effective idea is a phony bill of goods.
- [56:02]
A
Gangbusters indeed.
- [56:04]
B
That's so ridiculous.
- [56:08]
A
I know. What a. Take Frank Herbert.
- [56:11]
B
I mean of all the things that aged well, that aged poorly, that is hilariously off the mark. Yeah, and it's true. I mean it's true people like, yeah, people are less reliant on the one news media, sure, but. But that doesn't mean that now power isn't coalescing. It just means that some fucking kid in his basement can be indoctrinated by like a foreign government through a meme campaign. This isn't better. Yeah, good job.
- [56:46]
A
On average, this like explosion of communication I would argue has been a net negative. Actually it has. Like we now live in a world of disinformation. Easy day to day communication has certainly had some positives, but I think in aggregate, like across the spectrum has been more damaging than helpful. And so it is funny, like sitting here now in 2025 with the ability to go into the future. We can laugh at Frank Herbert's take here and be like, wow, that is hilariously optimistic of him to say that computer technology and easy, quick, fast communication is going to really open people's eyes. It's going to free them from the shackles of ignorance and from the shackles of control of big government and institutions. If anything, it has only continued to do what our boy Pat Stone said it has consolidated power and wealth in big businesses and centralized authorities, which is sad to think again. Frank really did paint a picture, a rosy picture of a future that I would want to live in, actually. But it's not the future that came about.
- [58:03]
B
I will just for the balance takes out there, I will say I think it's probably a net positive that we have the ability to share. Everyone has the ability to share all the time. I think that you're right that there's a lot of real crazy shit that's happened because of it. But having just been to Shanghai and been to China and seen what it looks like when you only have the one kind of governmental information flow, I have really active concerns around that and I'm thinking about.
- [58:33]
A
Interesting.
- [58:34]
B
Yeah, it's nice that we have the ability to make this podcast. I like that we've been able to see people on the ground in places like Gaza and in places that are war torn and very controlled algorithmically by the companies that don't necessarily want us to see too much, I think. Is that worth the cost? Whatever the cost is, as much as it's hard to kind of talk about.
- [58:58]
A
These things fully, as you said earlier, all interconnected.
- [59:01]
B
It's all interconnected. So it's really hard to tally a net positive, net negative summation. But I've got to think that it's not perfect yet and it probably never will be, but we continue to make it better. And it's more important for us to all be able to participate in sharing our perspective than the alternative, which can very quickly just become like China. And you Google what's happening anywhere in the world and it's like no fucking clue.
- [59:30]
A
Yeah.
- [59:31]
B
So anyway, maybe that's a whole episode within itself. Well, regardless of the flaws around Techno Peasantry, it is still fascinating, as always to hear the philosophy and the thoughts of this person who built this whole universe that we spend so much time in. Many of his views very obviously made their way into Dune. There is of course, the individual example, right. To reconsider the Ixians and the Tleilaxu through this Techno Peasantry lens. Yes, of course. Like, that's cool. The Fremen, right? The Fremen and how they use technology. They have technology. They have stillsuit manufacturing and water catch. They have catch tents and wind traps and things like that. Like, they have lots of manufacturing and technology. But it's all very deliberate for the sake of survival and for the sake of this plan for a green Arrakis. Like that is where they focus Their energy, and it's all very intentional.
- [60:33]
A
The Fremen are almost the ideal techno peasants as far as Frank's views go.
- [60:37]
B
Yeah, I think that's interesting. Also, more broadly, we look at the universe of Dune, post Butlerian Jihad, we see problems that humanity comes up against. And what is the solution? Well, the solution is human solutions. It's Mentats, it's Bene Gesserit. When there is technology, it's because that is like the correct technology for the job. We are not compulsively using technology on just a galactic scale. And I think that that's also kind of the techno peasantry idea applied to the whole universe.
- [61:12]
A
That's right. And in fact, within Frank's own lore, there is an inciting event that thrusts techno peasantry upon everybody in the galaxy. Right. The Butlerian jihad. This bloodletting across the Imperium, across the galaxy, that then forced humanity to change its perspective dramatically on how it treats technology and what kind of technology it allows into the Imperium going forward. That is essentially what Frank is laying out in his techno peasant future. And now that we know his views on technology and his philosophy of techno peasantry, it does reshape a lot of the technological landscape of the Dune universe. For me, it's very obvious that it's in line with Frank's thinking on this.
- [62:04]
B
Yeah, 100%. Well, to wrap up, that's our conversation today. But to wrap up, let's talk about techno peasantry again. Let's continue, but let's talk more personally. And, Abu, I want to know, has techno peasantry changed your view on technology at all? Is Frank's philosophy something that you're sold on, ready to commit to? You're going to stop your fucking impulsive ways? You're going to burn your Oor ring or whatever?
- [62:36]
C
That's right.
- [62:37]
A
He's taking it off right now.
- [62:39]
B
My God, he's doing it. He's doing it.
- [62:42]
A
I don't know. I feel a little naked. I'm putting it back on.
- [62:45]
B
He's undoing it. He's undoing it. He's sliding back. That's everything Frank knew would happen. So, yeah, talk to me. What's your personal relationship with technology? And where are you at? You going to fully adopt techno peasantry?
- [62:58]
A
I don't know that I'm capable of fully adopting techno peasantry, but I will say I'm very, very intrigued by the ideas that Frank lays out here in his philosophy. I think, again, on an individual level, Frank's philosophy of techno peasantry is incredibly Valuable, actually. And in classic Frank fashion, somehow his thoughts and ideas feel even more urgent and relevant today than they were 40 years ago when he spoke them. So I'm very, very drawn to the idea of techno peasantry. And I think on a personal level it can be transformative. Yeah, I've certainly been thinking about my relationship with my technology a lot lately. Just how much screen time, how many fucking useless gadgets I have in the house that I don't use that just collect dust. It's all very appealing to me. I would love to be a techno peasant. I do think as a society we have tipped the scales too far. We've sacrificed so much of our privacy and self reliance and autonomy for like cheap, quick convenience. Right. I want to tap a couple of things on my phone and like, I'm the fucking king of France, food shows up at my door. That's crazy.
- [64:19]
B
It's not that hard for me to like in France. He's the only one who's allowed to use GrubHub. That's a fact. GrubHub only for the king of France. Only.
- [64:30]
A
So I do think there is a rebalancing of the scales that is necessary on a personal level for me, just speaking for myself. But I do think on a societal level as well, I don't know that we need to be optimizing everything to death when it comes to the things we do. And sometimes the slower, more tedious, the less efficient way of doing something still ends up being the more fulfilling and valuable way of doing it.
- [64:56]
B
Sure.
- [64:56]
A
All of that being said, that to me is all kind of is relevant on a personal level, like we laid out in our critiques earlier. I do think techno peasantry begins to fall apart when you scale it up. And so I'm not fully bought in on the philosophy as the ultimate solution to human relationships with technology. I do think Frank was perhaps thinking a bit too narrowly, a bit too small scale. And I do think some of his idealism blinded him to the larger realities of systemic issues that can be deeply ingrained, like bigotry and the patriarchy and all of the like racial, gender, geographical, economic divides we talked about earlier. That sort of thing cannot be solved with a philosophy like techno peasantry. It's going to take a bigger, more refined idea and a lot more work from a lot more people to move the needle on things at that scale. So when it comes to that, I'm not sold. But I think as far as the scale of my own personal life, I could see myself adopting some techno Peasant ideas. What about you? Are you ready to become an adopter, an early adopter of this brand new philosophy for only $9.99 a month?
- [66:14]
B
Yeah, it's a subscription service. Technopeasant. I'll start broad actually, and I'll say that I think techno peasantry is a piece of a spectrum that maybe we just haven't really talked that much about societally yet, which is that how conscientious are you when you use technology and how intentional are you? And not that techno peasantry is a global solution to more things. It is something that individuals can be individually accountable around of. Yeah, I am making conscientious decisions about what technology I get and use. And I think that treated that way, it is blanket good. Agreed. It is not going to solve any broad problems. But if every person took the time to be intentional about the technology that they let into their lives and that sort of thing, I think we would have a lot less of people buying shit that then would market effects, market forces would take effect and less shit would be produced and that would lead to broader change. So I do think that if techno peasantry is an individual accountability around how cognizant you are about how you use technology, I am 100% in on we should all be that cognizant.
- [67:29]
A
Yeah, well said.
- [67:30]
B
That being said, this isn't necessarily that new for me because I worked at Apple for 12 years and my job at Apple was teaching classes on how to use the technology. And a lot of the time the people in the class didn't know how to use the technology. Not because they lacked the intelligence or whatever. It was just that they were afraid. They didn't really understand the technology. And I think a lot of them, I don't think I know a lot of them had holdups on should I even be using this technology? What's the purpose of this technology in my life? I'm worried that I'm going to go down the rabbit hole and I'm going to be like so and so in my life. Who anecdotally, you know, has a bad relationship with technology.
- [68:11]
A
They were sort of inherently techno peasants.
- [68:14]
B
Yeah, but I think that that's true for a lot of things. Like if there's a technology, like, do you have a VR headset?
- [68:22]
A
I don't.
- [68:23]
B
Why haven't you bought a VR headset?
- [68:27]
A
Price and utility. I can't picture how it would fit into my life yet.
- [68:36]
B
So would you say that you've looked at what they're offering and made a conscientious decision about whether or not you need the thing, and you've decided you don't.
- [68:45]
A
I would say that, yes.
- [68:47]
B
I think that we all fall into kind of a techno peasant mindset when it comes to certain emergent technologies you can get into. Like, I've been in that head space where I'm like, I buy every new little gadget. Whatever gidget. I buy every new little, like, gadget or whatever. Like, you know, I have been in that headspace before, but, like, especially as I get older, I just go, you know, I'll. I'll hear about this robot that lives in your house and spies on you. I'll, like, hear about that. But am I going to buy your wife? Clearly someone's wife is all I'm saying. Day two, it's going to fuck you. Day one is just to get your defenses down. Day two, fucks your wife. And, like, you know, it's cute. I get it. I mean, I'm. Or it fucks me, you know, like, it's gonna fuck someone. They've got soft bodies, all right? They're very, you know, Come on. What a cute face. Point is, I think that, like, I encountered a lot of students in my classes who were very cognizant of the fact that, like, technology, you adopt it for a reason to do a thing. And oftentimes they would say, teach me this computer, man. And we would have to kind of scale it back a bit and say, what are you hoping to get out of this? This is a shovel or a hoe. What job are you going to apply it for? And they would go, oh, I hadn't really thought of it that way. I just thought of it as, like, computer. And it's like, yeah, but it's a tool. And so I spent. I mean, again, I spent more than a decade advocating for people to have, like, healthy, balanced relationships with the technology, showing them things like screen time and going. Be cognizant of how much time you spend on this. It shouldn't. When you're taking photographs on your iPhone, you shouldn't be living life through the screen of your device. You should use it to celebrate photography and to do this artistic thing. I think I've benefited quite a bit from knowing how to take good photos on my iPhone. But that doesn't mean that I'm, like, at the concert, living the whole concert through the screen of my fucking iPhone. And there are so many people who do that. And it, like, I watched it. I was at the Japanese National Gallery, and I was watching people. The Tokyo National Gallery. I was watching people just walk up to something, take a picture and walk away from it. And I was like, what are you doing, dog? Like that. You're looking at something that's 800 years old and it's this incredible. Like, why not sit with it and just be present with the thing? So all of this.
- [71:11]
A
I went to go see Monet's Water lilies on that trip to France recently, and I was, like, so disgusted by people in there just walking around with their phone up, just making a video recording of the water lily's room.
- [71:26]
B
Yeah.
- [71:27]
A
And I was like, monet fucking handcrafted this so you could sit here and feel it.
- [71:32]
B
Yeah.
- [71:33]
A
Put your fucking phone away and feel something in this room.
- [71:36]
B
Feel it for a second. Yeah. Anyway, your point still stands.
- [71:41]
A
We got distracted by Monet.
- [71:43]
B
He's distracted. He's great. The point is, I think that people need to have a conscientious relationship with the technology. I think the idea of Techno Peasantry is an excellent conversation starter. And then I think, individually, I would love it if just about every person in the world had just a few minutes a week even to sit down and to just look at what is technology doing in my life? Is it good? Is it bad? Did I benefit from my OURA ring? If not, what do I do tomorrow to benefit from my OURA ring? And do I not want to do that? And if not, then cool, I'll sell it on ebay or whatever, and it's like someone else will benefit from it. So it's like, yeah, I think everyone would benefit from taking a step back occasionally, just evaluating. The same way that you would look at your like, does my body feel good? Maybe I should do more physical fitness? Am I eating good food? Do I feel good about that? Do I spend enough time with my parents and loved ones? We should all try to aspire to being a little bit better in all of those categories. And I think technology is just one of those.
- [72:51]
A
I completely agree with your opinions there as well. I think we're in exactly the same boat. It's a very strong philosophy. And I think Frank, as usual, shockingly well ahead of his time in his views. But as always, there's nuance and in some ways it falls short, but that's the reality of it.
- [73:12]
B
Indeed. Well, that is our episode, dear listeners. Go forth, be well in life and take stock. How often do you use your technology? But before we let you go, I'm going to remind you of some ways to support the show and support what we do here at Gom Jabbar and and that includes of course, as always, the two best ways. Number one, become a patron if you can. I know these days, finances crazy, the world uncertain, strange. But if you're able to $5 a month. It makes such a big difference for us to have that sort of bedrock support allows us to do all the stuff that we do. We are still a very scrappy operation and legitimately every single person makes a big difference. So we really appreciate it. We also do have some custom Dune themed swag on our merch store. As of recording it is still down, but it will be up eventually. And I've got some really great things cooking so check those out. You can get yourself something nice and support what we do at the same time. Those links are in the show notes. Check them out.
- [74:17]
A
And of course, my gosh, this is not where the conversation ends. We want to hear from you. Email us gomjabbarpodcastmail.com we'd love, love, love, love to hear your thoughts on your personal relationship with technology and whether techno peasantry is a philosophy that you would adopt. Would you radically change your approach to technology on a personal level? And do you think it would work at a societal and larger level? Tell us all of your thoughts. Send us a long dissertation. That paper is due by Monday. Upload that shit to Blackboard Monday. By 5pm it's going to be 30% of your dune grade, so.
- [74:52]
C
Wow. Wow.
- [74:53]
B
30%. Okay. What's the other 70% of your dune grade?
- [74:57]
A
It's sort of elusive and kind of a mystery.
- [75:00]
B
Grades within grades, Grades within grades.
- [75:06]
A
I mean, everybody's gonna get an A at the end, you know, because I love all of you, but.
- [75:10]
B
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
- [75:11]
A
You know, I gotta make it sound like I'm doing something.
- [75:15]
B
Yeah, my professor gave me an F. But then in parentheses it said so that you long for something outside of this class. And I realized I was. My professor was establishing stagnation in my. It was. And that's why I left college. And now my life is better. It's called the golden path of graduating.
- [75:35]
A
Who needs that art degree, right? Am I right?
- [75:37]
B
Who's got a degree?
- [75:45]
A
Well, friends, there is no real ending. It's just the place where you stop the recording. But this podcast is always one step beyond logic. So help spread the word of Quadib and leave us a review on Apple Podcasts and Spotify and be sure to check out the other shows on the Loreparty podcast network on loreparty.com you can also follow us on Twitter and Instagram Loraparty. We're also on YouTube. Thank you so much for listening. And remember, whoever controls controls the podcast controls the universe. We'll see you on the golden bath.