The Reversal Game: Finding Dystopian Sci-Fi Futures in the Present-Day World

Here’s a social dynamic you can use to create the “corrupted paradise” structure in dystopian worldbuilding for science fiction stories.

This is hard sci-fi — meaning that this dynamic will result in a future world that plausibly extrapolates from present-day reality.

Ongoing controversy surrounds admissions to Harvard University. A group of Asian-Americans — demographically “recent immigrants from mainland China who are highly educated” — are fighting against affirmative action in the Harvard admissions process.

From the beginning, the idea sounds strange: members of a minority group are fighting to reverse policies designed to fight discrimination against minorities? The dynamics themselves, however, are more widespread. As usual, racism is only an intermediate step.

The protestors who want to destroy affirmative action at Harvard have co-opted civil rights-era slogans — “judge people by their character, not the colour of their skin.” Sounds a lot like rhetorical games used in racist slogans like “all lives matter”, doesn’t it? Yes, it’s the same game.

Fighting Against Ourselves

Plot twist: highly-educated, recent Chinese-American immigrants are, in the short-term, pushing a perspective that, until now, has served the interests of wealthy white Americans. Dismantlement of affirmative action harms all non-white Americans. So why support its destruction?

The dystopian game in play can be called “reversal”. In the reversal game, a concept designed for one purpose (civil rights, in this case) is propagandised to embody its opposite (oppression). Real outcome: the rich get richer. Everyone else dehumanises each other and destroys their own rights.

In the Harvard case, recent Chinese-American immigrants are aware that Harvard has used discriminatory policies, and are fighting against them. The nuance is that the earlier policies favoured white students. Affirmative action has the same goal: rectifying discrimination.

The impetus behind (preferences for legacies and athletes) was what scholars now refer to as “negative action,” the preferential treatment of white over Asian-American applicants, rather than affirmative action, the consideration of race in admissions to boost underrepresented minorities and foster diversity. As Poon wrote in the book Contemporary Asian America, “The experience with negative action in the 1981s contributed to a collective memory for Asian Americans and wariness of possible anti-Asian quotas.”

The phrase “recent Chinese-American immigrants” is used here as a distinction to emphasise diminished comprehension of historical context, creating susceptibility to racist doublespeak. Similarly, “all lives matter” sounds fine for those who are unaware of its cultural background as a dogwhistle for racism.

In the Harvard admission case, reversal leads members of one minority to prey on members of other minorities. The final outcome is the destruction of policies designed to fight against income- and race-based discrimination. The rich get richer. The doors close for everyone else.

Crazy-Rich Everybody

Where else do we see the reversal game?

Super-wealthy individuals and groups create a doctrine that preaches a particular gospel of financial deregulation and anti-taxation. Politicians are universally corrupt liars who can’t be trusted. Mainstream media are “biased enemies of the people”.

More reversal games: Immigrants steal jobs from hard-working citizens. White Americans are an oppressed minority. Masculinity is under attack by “the matriarchy”. Education and healthcare must be privatised since the “invisible guiding hand of the market” is the only fair determinant of real value.

Racism is a proxy upholding corrupt institutions. As more people feel socioeconomic insecurity, they push down (bigotry) instead of up (at the super-rich). Now consider what “Crazy Rich Asians” stands for, in this dystopian context. Crazy Rich [Everybody]. That’s the game.

The (Illegal) Aliens Are Coming! We Need a Spaceship to Mars!

Dystopian outcomes of reversal games: institutionalised racism as well as gender- and income discrimination lead elite universities to remain open only to those who are wealthy or game the system. Deregulation creates a boom-and-bust superstar economy of extractive investors and real-estate vultures.

Corporate tax exemption drains society of infrastructure funding and social services. This results in neglect of infrastructure (roadways, the power grid, industrial control systems), unaffordable healthcare, inadequate education, and “do-it-yourself” disaster relief in a time of climate change. Schools in low-income neighborhoods become a zero-tolerance doorstep to corporate-run prisons.

Hypercapitalist religious dogma leads to public obsession: imitate reality-show consumer lifestyles of “A-list” celebrities. Hire “alpha” billionaire CEOs for president instead of personally running for office, participating in representative democracy (i.e. voting), or exercising critical thought in “political” art.

Immigrants are demonised to the point that thousands of Spanish-speaking Americans are left to die after natural disasters because they are not “pure” enough, despite being full-bloodied citizens.

The term “illegal alien” becomes synonymous with “subhuman entity to be thrown away.” Their families are torn apart indefinitely; children are psychologically and physically abused in detainment centers. Some are lost in the system and simply disappear, while others may be adopted in a scenario that only separates them further from their real parents.

Every twenty-four hours, a new raft of clickbait headlines wash the memory of their lives away, enabled by surveillance capitalism via “free” social media run by billionaires whose only truth is the destruction of privacy.

Mainstream media is replaced by sensationalism and extremist quasi-state propaganda, clothed in familiar cliches: racism, misogyny, homophobia, religious hatred, xenophobia.

This genre is “science fiction.” If you want to create hard sci-fi stories that begin with our real world, the reversal game is one place to start.

AltSciFi, Gamergate, Online Bullies and the Internet Gender Wars

Question: What is AltSciFi, exactly?

As you may have noticed in recent blog entries, we are evolving.

Is it…
…punk?
…cyber?
…indie sci-fi art, including short stories, novels and music, as well as film and other visuals?
…digital civil/human rights?

Or is AltSciFi about Internet culture and multimedia literacy?

Answer: Yes.

All of the topics mentioned above directly influence the course of civilization and therefore are necessary components of any future-oriented storyline. Our emphasis is on hard sci-fi — science fiction that extrapolates from the real, scientifically probable world. Understanding the world through science is a necessary first step in creating hard sci-fi. Even fantastical science fiction benefits from a plausible starting point in crafting its story worlds’ physics and geography.

Translation: AltSciFi is equal parts SJW pretension, pissed-off hippie, unrepentant computer geek, and a generous pinch of tech-fetish NSFW. AltSciFi exists to help artists, writers and techies (subtypes of “artisan/craftsmen/craftswomen”) discover each other — and a paying audience.

Special note: if you’re an older person, you’re fine. Ageism sucks. If you’re a weird or artistically inclined older person, even better.

We Are Real

Pattern recognition: most of those with hundreds of Followers on the social Web are lifers, IRL celebs, dumb joke repeaters, or sexy lewdposters. (Of course, the most ubiquitous category of popular Twitter user is the Spambot Collector.)

AltSciFi is 100% real. Our members are all real humans. No spambots or spammers of any kind allowed.

Gamergate, Online Bullies and the Internet Gender Wars

Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn and more take aim at cyber harassment against women in new report

As one of the most prominent figures embroiled in GamerGate, a loosely organized crusade to rid of the video game world of progressive voices, Quinn mentioned having “sat for two weeks in a chatroom silently recording them plotting how they would [drive her to kill herself]” during the period in which her online antagonizers were most virulent. […]

Although Zoe Quinn is technically connected to science fiction as a “game developer” (not really), that mess really isn’t worth more words.

Perhaps the strangest point about the SJW (or “social justice warrior”) crowd is that they’re just as much a mindless group of Internet bullies as the Gamergate crew.

Both sides (Gamergate/SJW) cry about “victimization”, then abruptly go about persecuting anyone in their path who deviates from their views. Neither Gamergate nor SJW are about “justice”. They’re about the exercise of human tribalistic herd tendencies transmuted to a new medium.

Similar to Internet Masculinism (“Meninism”…?) and Internet Feminism (not to be confused with the real kind), they complain about victimization — then avenge their emotional wounds using the same shame-and-bully tactics.

The cognitive/emotive blind spot that leads victims to unknowingly become bullies offers a perfect opportunity for indirect learning via fiction. (Realistically, though, if a person avoids learning, no amount of indirect suggestion will change their minds for long. Still worth a try.)

You never know how close a person is to change until you give them a gentle nudge. ;)

That’s the hidden power of science fiction.

Hard Sci-Fi Made Easy: Jumping the Paywall While Researching Facts for Science Fiction Stories, Visuals, Songs and Films

One of the greatest joys of science-based “hard sci-fi” is the ability to learn and sample from a vast array of real scientific fields and disciplines.

To create hard sci-fi requires well-developed research habits and study skills. It can feel at times like playing with ideas from a university course developed in a future (or past, or alternative present) that did not exist prior to your discovery. You construct your own unique curriculum while researching the people, cultures, circumstances and worlds that you are building for your story.

As such, at times it will be inevitable to bump up against man-made limitations in our quest for access to information.

How can we gain open access to needlessly restricted data?

Notes below are extracted from a talk by Storm Harding titled “Jumping the Paywall: How to freely share research without being arrested”, offered at the 2015 Chaos Communication Camp.

Disclaimer:

Any particular tenses I may use, and any particular tenses you may hear, are not indicative of any kind of injunctions to action; we are always operating on a purely imaginative framework.

Approaches to content access and intellectual property

Gary Hall, 2009. “Pirate Philosophy (Version 1.0): Open Access, Open Editing, Free Content, Free/Libre/Open Media”, in Culture Machine 10. pp. 1-43.

Ted Striphas and Kembrew McLeod, 2006. “Strategic Improprieties – Cultural Studies, The Everyday and the Politics of IP”, in Cultural Studies 20 (2-3). pp. 119-144.

Aaron Swartz. 2008. Guerilla Open Access Manifesto.

Open-Access Information Sources

PLOS (Public Library of Science)
…-see also PLOS One for peer-reviewed science publications.

Alternative Content Procurement Vectors

Library Genesis
libgen.io (mirror: http://gen.lib.rus.ec)
— may change to .biz, .org, etc.

Sci-Hub

Crowdsourced Resources

Reddit Scholar

Twitter Hashtag #ICanHazPDF

Google Scholar

Also, check the personal/work pages of the authors (if not for the article links, then for their email addresses)

Or, physically visit the university library itself.

Be sure to watch the talk at the CCC 2015 website for more ideas and thoughts along related lines.

Also, not mentioned in the talk:

If you want to access an article that is paywalled online, try running a Google search that results in a link to the article; if you click the article link from the Google search results list, it may open without further issues.

To avoid having paywall “countdowns” (i.e. ‘You have x number of free articles left this month’, etc.), use a proxy like Tor and regularly empty out your cache and cookies. Further details about how do to this can be found elsewhere on the Web if necessary.

Enjoy researching your science fiction works; far from drudgery, the learning process can stimulate new ideas and expand your creative horizons. The farther you go toward grounding your stories in authentic science, the more your readers will trust your voice and have the chance to be inspired by the worlds that you create.

Transgender, Transracial, Transhuman? The Near-Future Transformation of Personal Identity

A few years ago, I wrote the short story-turned-novella “Riding the Bullet”.
Riding the Bullet is the story of a young woman’s trans-Pacific bullet train
abventure to New York City in a postapocalyptic near-future.

Of particular interest is a humorously-depicted feature of her fashion and style that seems to have predicted a debacle raging over social media in the past day or so.

Excerpt below (glad to note great strides in fiction-writing skill since then):

“Yup, tonight I’m Blackinasian. You’re Whitetina? Rock. And Jens is what? Beige? Again? He was beige at the Black party last month. Well, you know what they say… reminds me, I’ve got to drink this crazy ganguro potion — stopped especially to get it at 109 in Shibuya. No, not that kind of potion. I want to get a little darker before the party.”

Digging into the bag, a plastic bottle screamed its electric blue letters against a black background. “U-Polish! Give it To Ur Skin!” shouted the bold, uppercase letters of nonsensical Japanese Engrish. A few shakes and a twist of the cap opened the bottle. Wincing at the slimy texture, a third of the oily, sludgy substance was downed in one shot. Artificial melanocytes began their journey of diffusion from digestive organs to the largest organ of the body, the skin, evenly darkening by temporarily and naturally increasing the amount of pigment across the body’s surface.

Excerpt from Riding the Bullet, original novella, 2012

A news story has exploded in certain corners of journalism and even bleeds into pop-culture commentary. The story has a hashtag, and that hashtag is a person’s name. Her name is Rachel Dolezal.

The Internet shame-and-scorn game has gone into overdrive, of course, as its attention- and stimulus-starved denizens tend to do constantly nowadays.

You can read more about the controversy here (click here).

At the core of the issue is a deceptively straightforward question: Can a person switch racial identification if they feel a deep, personality-level affinity for that racial identity?

Mythology Meets Science Fiction: Race in Present and Future

In the novella Riding the Bullet, the main character is an Asian woman who darkens her skin for the sake of fashion and personal style.

Rachel Dolezal seems to have taken on a completely new identity as a black American woman, even to the point of marrying a black man, adopting four black children, and disacknowledging her (Caucasian) parents (given the fact that her parents were the ones who so gracelessly “outed” her to the mass media, she may have had good reason for wanting to delete them from her life).

In that sense, Dolezal has become part of a black family — as the popular term now would have it, her “family of choice”.

Many reactions have questioned the possibility that she could change her racial identity.

Questions and objections include:

1. Rachel Dolezal is engaging in “blackface” and most be stopped by any means necessary, especially via Twitter-based ridicule!

Actually, Dolezal is a legitimate civil rights advocate who teaches courses on African-American culture and is the president of her local NAACP chapter in Spokane, Washington. That is about as far as it gets from being a stereotype-wielding “blackface” performer or entertainer.

2. Rachel Dolezal is profiteering from affirmative action through a diabolically clever and fiendishly perverse reverse-race incentive scheme!

Affirmative action exists because of structural inequality in American culture. By definition, a white person would have an easier time building a career by claiming to be white — that’s the whole reason why affirmative action exists. The logic of a white woman taking financial advantage of “passing as black” is inherently self-contradictory.

3. Rachel Dolezal is “crazy”.

If someone cannot fathom an idea, they will often try to discredit the person instead of the idea. For LGBT people, this meant decades of psychiatric torture, chemical castration and psychologically disastrous “conversion” therapy practiced by religious fundamentalists. Now we have the same defamatory reaction leveled against Rachel Dolezal. “She is different. I don’t understand and don’t care. Hence, she is ‘crazy’ and somehow therefore eligible for ostracism, shaming and bullying.”

Rachel Dolezal may have other psychological problems. That is not the issue here, nor does it diminish the questions that her case raises regarding race and identity.

4. Black people can’t “transition” to become white, so it’s not fair (and therefore not possible) for a white woman to change her racial identity, either!

In fact, many black people (including biracial people) do not have dark skin and may be as light-skinned as Rachel Dolezal. This may be true even before tanning or other skin-darkening treatments as Dolezal seems to have undergone. Also, many peoples of the world have “black” skin: Thai, East Indian, and Aboriginal Australian among them. Therefore, skin tone or stereotypically “African” features do not determine race in any way.

How can this be true, if so many people believe otherwise?

In the tradition of hard sci-fi (science fiction based on plausible science), we can look at what scientists have to say on the topic.

What they say is conclusive: The notion of race is itself has never been scientifically validated. There is only one “human race”, and scientifically we humans all belong to a single species named “homo sapiens sapiens”.

Race, like, gender, is a not a biological attribute. Gender is behavior, not biology — and perhaps the same is true of racial identification.

Japanese Identity: Bicultural, Biracial

As noted above, many peoples of the world are black, even though they are not directly of African descent.

In the sci-fi novella “Riding the Bullet”, our protagonist chats with her friend about playing with race and ethnicity due to advances in pop-culture norms and technology-driven capabilities.

The idea drew real-life inspiration from a phenomenon in Japan known as kuro gyaru (“black girl”) style, in which teenage and mid-twenties girls deeply tan and darken their skin for the sake of beauty and style.

There is also a less extreme trend in Japanese hip hop culture whereby young women practice “B-style”, or “Black style”. The goal there is to imitate black American female hip-hop artists and music video girls.

Miss Universe Japan, Ariana Miyamoto.

Are these girls trying to become black? No. They are still Japanese. The deeper point is that, for example, a biracial person like Miss Universe Japan, Ariana Miyamoto, looks similar to the “gyaru” and is as black as two-term American president Barack Obama. Although she is very much Japanese, Miyamoto has faced a wave of racist sentiment from other Japanese people because a person who looks like her “just can’t be” from Japan. This makes the question far more ambiguous than it might seem at face value, both literally and figuratively.

The Relationship of Race and Gender

Meanwhile, another non-traditional identity is that of the transgender person. Many people have recently begun to accept that a person can experience what is clinically called “gender dysphoria” — a sense of having been born the wrong gender. This dysphoria, for some, leads to a desire to change physical attributes in ways that align more closely with the person’s self-perception. Examples of “passable” transgender people include couture model Andreja Pejić, actress Laverne Cox, and performer Carmen Carrera.

If gender can be changed, why not race?

Advances in surgery, endocrine/hormone treatments, and behavior change make it possible to completely transform a person’s appearance to match their self-image. As time passes, these procedures are becoming more and more refined. Within a generation, the question of gender may soon be more a matter of how far you can afford to take the process of body modification in order to attain a desired appearance. Society has also begun to accept that although a person may be genetically male or female, their (cultural) gender identification may legitimately differ.

If there is such thing as “gender dysphoria”, why not “racial dysphoria” as well?

Rachel Dolezal lied about her race, but she also seems to geniunely want to exemplify an ideal of activism and scholarship. If she had been accepted for what she feels herself to be, perhaps the lies would have been unnecessary. This is exactly the same as the plight faced by transgender people every day of their lives; the parallel is direct and unmistakable.

Not So Black-and-White After All: Welcome to the (Trans)Human Race

Feminism is often thought of in terms of “women versus men”, when that is not the case. Is race a simplistic binary distinction of “black versus white”, or are there more degrees of freedom in self-image and the viable construction of social persona?

In the near future, people may realize that race, like gender, is a social construction, not a biological certainty determined by birth or genetics. Just as gender dysphoria does not mean that a person is “crazy”, racial diversity may become recognized as having an intrapsychic dimension as well as a social one.

We don’t need to reach for far-out futures like the one depicted in “Riding the Bullet”. We don’t need to classify diversity as some kind of science fiction (or worse, derisively refer to human beings as “science experiments” by way of dimwittedly degrading both a person’s humanity and science itself).

One day soon, we may witness the acceptance of individuals who are free to live their lives as they see fit and express their personal identity as they imagine themselves to be. Maybe science fiction can help point us toward that eventuality a bit sooner, or at least give us a playfully serious occasion to consider alternative possibilities.

Who Is Eating What, If Software Ultimately Eats All?

Software Is Made By People.
The World Is Made Of People.
Software Is Eating The World.

Who Is Eating What?

The easy answer, according to Internet lore, is most likely “soylent green”.

Image of pea-soup green liquid being poured into a bowl. Caption: 'National health care is people serving people.' Meme: Keep calm: Tuesday is Soylent Green Day.
Soylent Green: National health care is people serving people. Keep calm! Tuesday is Soylent Green day.

Although the syllogism above is intended as a joke, real implications have arrived in ways that most people failed to anticipate. Even prescient minds like the one residing in Netscape co-founder Marc Andreessen’s egg-shaped cranium may not have foreseen what software could one day evolve to be.

Judging from their behavior, most non-techie people still seem mostly unaware that the digital world (and therefore, the real world as well) is rapidly shifting beneath their feet.

The speed of change is so quick and (resisting the buzzword “disruptive”) unprecedented that many software engineers themselves have been taken by surprise. These trends have the relatively closed world of programmers and systems designers questioning their most closely-guarded values. Those who were there in the early days are now taking a hard look at how things have changed since the inception of the Internet as a popular medium.

Science fiction’s dystopian fantasies are no longer far-fetched. In fact, we see manifestations of this in systems as widely accepted as Facebook — and in programmers’ public collaboration tools like Github and Sourceforge.

If software is eating the world, a science fiction writer or artist would do well to consider the impact of software in their future-oriented stories. We may not be able to predict the next leap in telecommunications, but be we can extrapolate privacy concerns and their likely outcomes if present-day events continue along current lines.

Comments below are derived from this conversation (click here).

Programmers speak on the beginnings of a not-so-brave new world order

I’ve been a little uneasy about the knee-jerk tendency to resort to GitHub for everything, myself. If it were part of a Mozilla-like foundation, maybe, but it’s someone’s for-profit company; who knows how they will change in the future? The history of the consumer web is rife with companies that sell out their ostensible core principles, and, more importantly, their users’ data when the business tide turns against them.

I agree with the author that GitHub cannot be trusted. They already have been removing repositories because of political reasons.

(Ed. Note: “C plus equality”… A satirical feminist programming language, or as another user phrased it, “Pages and pages of barely coherent ranting against straw feminism, some of it in the form of pseudo code.”

See also: this subthread (click here) for details.)

I keep thinking about how my generation fought for “Information wants to be free”. However, I really meant for the people in power to share their information. This generation seems to think it means “give all my information to the people in power for free”. I was hoping for decentralisation, instead we got even more centralisation. Not sure how this happened.

GitHub is actually not the one that bothers me the most. I’ve got a couple of personal projects running there. But gmail creeps me the fuck out. I’ve got 8 years worth of mail on a personal server. I’m also Facebook-averse.

I am not so worried about access so much as about the unknown.

Example – you’ve always been able to put pictures on Facebook. But who would have guessed that they’d start running automated facial recognition on each and every one, without asking first? Lots of people are not okay with this, but your recourse is limited once you’re attached to the ecosystem. And it came very much out of left field one day.

I don’t know what kind of nefarious stuff is possible with github, but to me, that “I don’t know,” and the implicit trust you have to give this corporation in order to use the service is exactly the problem. Maybe there is something that works against your interests buried in the TOS that has no application yet, but will allow them to do things with your code (or maybe not your code – your name? brand? reputation? something else?) at some point in the future.

This isn’t to say I avoid it completely. But if I were in charge of a really big code project, I would certainly have to make a considered decision first.

Why am I not using GitHub?

Simple: The code I work on is proprietary and copyrighted, and storing it on someone else’s servers is like sticking our chin out asking to get popped one.

“There is no cloud, only other people’s computers.”