This article is a bit abstract for me, although I think I agree with its premise.
> The mature aesthetic values coherence over novelty, proportion over impact, durability over statement.
I see this in the Venezuela situation. Today Trump may enrich himself and his family or friends by stealing Venezuelan oil. Millions of Americans will support him in this. What happens ten years from now? None of them know or care. But the destruction of America’s reputation will have permanent consequences.
Also, I wonder who the author thinks are mature civilizations? China? India? Japan? And what is the playbook to make America mature - when its citizens don’t seem to care about this?
GWBudenbauer•1mo ago
Author here. Thanks for engaging with this seriously - your Venezuela example is precisely the thinking I'm after.
On your questions:
1. "Who are mature civilizations?" - I'd argue we haven't seen one yet at scale. Japan comes closest in some ways (maintenance culture, long time horizons, aesthetic restraint), but still operates within the juvenile global system. Traditional societies often had mature characteristics (indigenous land management, craft traditions that prioritized duration over novelty) but lacked the technical capacity we have now.
The question isn't "which civilization is mature" but "what would maturity look like with modern technical capacity?" That's what the mobile rooms are about - demonstrating that sufficiency can be designed, not just preached.
2. "What's the playbook?" - That's the harder question. I don't think you can make a civilization mature through policy or persuasion. But you can build material alternatives that make maturity visible. When housing costs force people into a perpetual state of economic adolescence (renting, moving, instability), they can't mature, even if they want to.
The Venezuela example you raised is perfect: juvenile foreign policy (grab resources, export costs beyond time horizon, prioritize novelty/impact over coherence/durability). A mature foreign policy would ask: "What do we need to sustain ourselves without injury to others?" But that requires redesigning systems at every scale - including how individuals live.
Re: "a bit abstract" - fair criticism. The abstraction is necessary to diagnose the pattern, but the prescription has to be material. That's why I've spent all these years on the rooms - to show that philosophical maturity has to become structural, not just attitudinal.
SilverElfin•1mo ago
> The mature aesthetic values coherence over novelty, proportion over impact, durability over statement.
I see this in the Venezuela situation. Today Trump may enrich himself and his family or friends by stealing Venezuelan oil. Millions of Americans will support him in this. What happens ten years from now? None of them know or care. But the destruction of America’s reputation will have permanent consequences.
Also, I wonder who the author thinks are mature civilizations? China? India? Japan? And what is the playbook to make America mature - when its citizens don’t seem to care about this?
GWBudenbauer•1mo ago
On your questions:
1. "Who are mature civilizations?" - I'd argue we haven't seen one yet at scale. Japan comes closest in some ways (maintenance culture, long time horizons, aesthetic restraint), but still operates within the juvenile global system. Traditional societies often had mature characteristics (indigenous land management, craft traditions that prioritized duration over novelty) but lacked the technical capacity we have now.
The question isn't "which civilization is mature" but "what would maturity look like with modern technical capacity?" That's what the mobile rooms are about - demonstrating that sufficiency can be designed, not just preached.
2. "What's the playbook?" - That's the harder question. I don't think you can make a civilization mature through policy or persuasion. But you can build material alternatives that make maturity visible. When housing costs force people into a perpetual state of economic adolescence (renting, moving, instability), they can't mature, even if they want to.
The Venezuela example you raised is perfect: juvenile foreign policy (grab resources, export costs beyond time horizon, prioritize novelty/impact over coherence/durability). A mature foreign policy would ask: "What do we need to sustain ourselves without injury to others?" But that requires redesigning systems at every scale - including how individuals live.
Re: "a bit abstract" - fair criticism. The abstraction is necessary to diagnose the pattern, but the prescription has to be material. That's why I've spent all these years on the rooms - to show that philosophical maturity has to become structural, not just attitudinal.