No amount of discourse, can change the fact that we've entered an alternate reality, that's only visible when reflected in the digital world which has eroded any form of negotiation with the ethereal horizon.

— Jhinn Bay

Recently, I read unruly capital's thesis on depopulation. Stefano claims that we are going extinct, and he uses shakey statistics of experts "lying" to strengthen his claim, and when he produces his claim, the source at the bottom is from 2013, from Stuart Gietel-Basten.

Stuart Gietel-Basten has much more recent work, and if Stefano is going to use proof for his population claim from an author, why use data that's 10 years old when there's more recent data available? Was he using this graph that he found because he felt it connected to his point, or was he just building up something loosely strung because the topic was weighing on him, or maybe his [enframement] of this problem just fits nicely into his investment firm's list of blog articles.

To me, it reads as performative fear-mongering, because it begins with "trust me bro, the experts are lying" meme and outdated statistics from 2003-2013, outdated statistics which make it seem like Stefano didn't actually do in depth research on the subject, and he fails to acknowledge his own [enframement] problem. Because the solution and message he propitiates is catalyzed pandemonium, and [illusory context].

Basten even directly criticizes exactly this style of argument:

• Extrapolating collapse far into the future

• Treating projections as destiny

• Using urgency to justify radical ideological conclusions

“Such projections are tools to demonstrate the consequences of the social recession of low fertility… Their purpose is to frighten people into having (more) children — without doing anything to address the legitimate concerns that lead to lower fertility” (Gietel-Basten 63). - Depopulation or Population Decline? Demographic Nightmares and Imaginaries.' (2023)

Gietel-Basten’s more recent work conflicts with Stefano enframement because...

Population decline is inevitable, even if humanity achieves it's delueizian desire for a machine body, the power-source will fail, the sun will collapse. We can't control everything in our world, and using the internet to proliferate panic is dangerous.

Not because of the stress or correctness, but because of the [enframement].

• Focus on quality of life, not population size.

• Learn from other cultures already adapting successfully.

• Shift policy from “more babies” to better systems (work, care, housing, equality).

“Tackling these challenges will require holistic, joined up responses and integrated planning — which are not the strong suits of most governments” (Gietel-Basten 61).

When we [enframe] population decline as a problem, publish an article, and do nothing to solve any of the problems, we are only producing [context] within our biases frame of capital, money, and status, which are all the opposite of the correct solutions we need.

Which is why we believe at Mental Wealth Academy, it will be education access. Because while Stefano may have had good intentions with his research, the [enframement] is the most dangerous aspect of it, because it creates panic with no solution, and proliferates old statistics and aged material without follow-up [context] data from it's author.

The conclusion Basten has is the most important aspect because if Stefano had read that the PhD of Social Science is telling you that we need more governance, not panic, it's likely that the entire article would have shifted it's tone and message.

and because the population solution is less about having sex and immigration, and more about governance, it's time to really start thinking critically on how DAOs can help us in the future.

the [enframement problem] is a dangerous lack of knowledge that creates an [illusion of context] even when none is available to be perceived, the [unframing] of [content] is what also creates magic tricks, if the slight of hand moves precisely as the [frame] changes around the [context] the [illusionary content] provides a [frame] which is not actually there, and the human brain must create it's own [frame] in order to process and give meaning to what just happened. The danger of [enframement] is that outside of the [context] of a magic show, the [illusionary content] can quickly proliferate mistruths and misnomers that become maladaptive day-dreams that split identity and disruption.

[en/framement]

an entirely different phenomena of human language, meaning-making, and the basis of our inability to discern, while navigating tools, all tools, and the gap between us and them.

MLA Works Cited entry

Gietel-Basten, Stuart. “Depopulation or Population Decline? Demographic Nightmares and Imaginaries.” Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, vol. 21, 2023, pp. 57–68. Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, https://doi.org/10.1553/p-ak37-74ha.

No amount of discourse, can change the fact that we've entered an alternate reality, that's only visible when reflected in the digital world which has eroded any form of negotiation with the ethereal horizon.

— Jhinn Bay

Recently, I read unruly capital's thesis on depopulation. Stefano claims that we are going extinct, and he uses shakey statistics of experts "lying" to strengthen his claim, and when he produces his claim, the source at the bottom is from 2013, from Stuart Gietel-Basten.

Stuart Gietel-Basten has much more recent work, and if Stefano is going to use proof for his population claim from an author, why use data that's 10 years old when there's more recent data available? Was he using this graph that he found because he felt it connected to his point, or was he just building up something loosely strung because the topic was weighing on him, or maybe his [enframement] of this problem just fits nicely into his investment firm's list of blog articles.

To me, it reads as performative fear-mongering, because it begins with "trust me bro, the experts are lying" meme and outdated statistics from 2003-2013, outdated statistics which make it seem like Stefano didn't actually do in depth research on the subject, and he fails to acknowledge his own [enframement] problem. Because the solution and message he propitiates is catalyzed pandemonium, and [illusory context].

Basten even directly criticizes exactly this style of argument:

• Extrapolating collapse far into the future

• Treating projections as destiny

• Using urgency to justify radical ideological conclusions

“Such projections are tools to demonstrate the consequences of the social recession of low fertility… Their purpose is to frighten people into having (more) children — without doing anything to address the legitimate concerns that lead to lower fertility” (Gietel-Basten 63). - Depopulation or Population Decline? Demographic Nightmares and Imaginaries.' (2023)

Gietel-Basten’s more recent work conflicts with Stefano enframement because...

Population decline is inevitable, even if humanity achieves it's delueizian desire for a machine body, the power-source will fail, the sun will collapse. We can't control everything in our world, and using the internet to proliferate panic is dangerous.

Not because of the stress or correctness, but because of the [enframement].

• Focus on quality of life, not population size.

• Learn from other cultures already adapting successfully.

• Shift policy from “more babies” to better systems (work, care, housing, equality).

“Tackling these challenges will require holistic, joined up responses and integrated planning — which are not the strong suits of most governments” (Gietel-Basten 61).

When we [enframe] population decline as a problem, publish an article, and do nothing to solve any of the problems, we are only producing [context] within our biases frame of capital, money, and status, which are all the opposite of the correct solutions we need.

Which is why we believe at Mental Wealth Academy, it will be education access. Because while Stefano may have had good intentions with his research, the [enframement] is the most dangerous aspect of it, because it creates panic with no solution, and proliferates old statistics and aged material without follow-up [context] data from it's author.

The conclusion Basten has is the most important aspect because if Stefano had read that the PhD of Social Science is telling you that we need more governance, not panic, it's likely that the entire article would have shifted it's tone and message.

and because the population solution is less about having sex and immigration, and more about governance, it's time to really start thinking critically on how DAOs can help us in the future.

the [enframement problem] is a dangerous lack of knowledge that creates an [illusion of context] even when none is available to be perceived, the [unframing] of [content] is what also creates magic tricks, if the slight of hand moves precisely as the [frame] changes around the [context] the [illusionary content] provides a [frame] which is not actually there, and the human brain must create it's own [frame] in order to process and give meaning to what just happened. The danger of [enframement] is that outside of the [context] of a magic show, the [illusionary content] can quickly proliferate mistruths and misnomers that become maladaptive day-dreams that split identity and disruption.

[en/framement]

an entirely different phenomena of human language, meaning-making, and the basis of our inability to discern, while navigating tools, all tools, and the gap between us and them.

MLA Works Cited entry

Gietel-Basten, Stuart. “Depopulation or Population Decline? Demographic Nightmares and Imaginaries.” Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, vol. 21, 2023, pp. 57–68. Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, https://doi.org/10.1553/p-ak37-74ha.