"Utopia is a having a coffee maker" James Holden, probably

Earth's great advantage over the other powers is Chrisjen Avasarala.

It's interesting to me how the factions in The Expanse mimic the factions in the Peloponnesian War. The U.N. is like Athens, Mars is like Sparta, and the Belters are like the Helots. Could be entirely circumstantial....but it seems that there is a lot of similarities.

"Life is pain, highness. Anyone who tells you differently is selling something."

“Humanity has done amazing things by just muddling through, arguing and complaining and fighting and negotiating. It’s messy and undignified, but it’s when we’re at our best, because everyone gets to have a voice in it. Even if everyone else is trying to shout it down. Whenever there’s just one voice that matters, something terrible comes out of it.” -Jim Holden in Persepolis Rising, Book 8 of the Expanse, by James S. A. Corey

" Utopia is having good water pressure" - Josephus Miller, probably :0

"I don't prepare for war because I want war. I do so because I love peace."

This was obviously made before Marco Inaros wrecked the homeworld by throwing rocks at it.

"Human mecha, Bobbie Draper..." Accurate

Kind of a weird take on the definition of utopia. Unity of thought and a lack of dynamism or conflict is a very particular version of utopia based on mid-20th century total ideologies. Most modern utopias acknowledge and require interpersonal and personal conflict to bring forth human creativity, innovation, and growth and rely less on external forces to exert unity. Even within TV scifi, Star Trek represents the Federation as a utopia where there isn't conflict over resources, but individuals are expected to challenge themselves and change society, but for the better.

That was a semester's worth of Political Science in ten minutes!!!

"If everyone's in agreement there is tyranny." Er, no, tyranny is the opposite, someone forcing their views against another's disagreement. "There are no checks on thought" Again, that's like the opposite of tyranny. And you're saying it like it's a bad thing. Are checks on thought a good thing? "There is no moderating force on the most extreme propositions of man" Um... they would be no longer extreme or moderate propositions, that requires different propositions. It's all moot, as total unity is impossible. Even amongst geeks there is the war between mediums - comic fans vs readers vs watchers vs gamers, gamers are warring between mobile casuals, console peasants and pcmustardrace, PC gamers are torn over genres and generations, even fans of a single game are fighting over favorite character and/or strategy. This is simply how people are. I get your point that tension is needed and is a good thing... but you are presenting it in a really weird way. Moreover, tensions are not the same, they are on a spectrum of cooperation vs competition. On one extreme is something like WW2, where losing meant the end of existence (at least for the countries, and quite a lot of people), and every measure was deemed acceptable to win. Then are the more limited wars of Vietnam & Korea, where nukes were available but not used, then there is the rest of the Cold War, where there was posturing and arms races but no (direct) confrontation. Then we get to the current world, where there are trade wars and economic competition, but most countries are not afraid of being wiped out and not having absurd military budgets. So of course tension is fine, but Utopia would be a more cooperative place, with more constructive competition. Mars could put more money into terraforming, instead of its military. Earth could invest into its ecological and poverty programs, instead of more space battleships and defenses. Both could be competing in scientific achievements, not military buildup. I find the premise of The Expanse to be very naive. In times of higher tension and danger people fall into tribal behavior. They don't cross to the other side for cooperation, they hold their noses when faced with internal problems. During the Cold War the US cooperated with terrorists and dictatorships, did atrocities and coups, all in the name of defeating the Commies. They did not reach out to the USSR when seeing internal corruption. The same happens right now in the US, Republicans holding their noses and sticking with Trump, Democrats holding their noses and sticking with Biden. The same would happen in The Expanse - "Our leaders may be corrupt authoritarians, but the other side is surely much worse! We can't afford disunity right now!". And this is the worst side of humanity.

The Belters have done nothing too serious he says, clearly this was made before season 5.

The Shadows of Z'ha'dum officially approve of your theory of continual conflict being the ideal means to achieve a utopian state. --Mr. Morden (P.S. Those Vorlon ice cubes will just discipline their minds into utter stasis if we didn't stir up the pot from time to time and make'em man their squid ships and get out & about and see how we're reshaping the galaxy!)

Eden is a life with just enough challenges to be interesting, and enough stability for you to be over-all content and open the door with a bittersweet smile when death knocks on your door 🙂

There's a similar adage being said by everyone's favourite Canadian psychologist, which I'll paraphrase; "You want to exist in the dynamic state between order and chaos. If you're in a state of order all the time, you don't learn and things stagnate. If you're in a state of chaos all the time, nothing works and you still don't learn." Interesting thoughts - good vid :)

Utopia to me is a post scarcity environment where people can chose to pursue careers/trades rather then Jobs. Much like in classic Startrek, i don't expect the elimination of conflict but a change in its nature that motivates people to explore themselves and the nature of life or reality.

So fighting to have a utopia is utopia. Interesting video. It reminds me of how politicians are all up in each other's face infront of the people and aggressive in defending their parties but as soon as they're out of camera they are friends and do business with each other and it's all a pretense they keep up for their voters. Sometimes it's so heated but sometimes it's just a system of imbalance that keeps the balance.

Personally I'd view Utopia as a world with no wars, all using clean renewable energy... and the ability to disagree on things without devolving into violence or insults.

There is a Chinese proverb that goes something like this: What is whole, must fragment and what is is pieces, must put itself back together.

This channel is what got me into The Expanse, I'd like to thank you for that. Also genuinely enjoyed this video, I really got my mind working, MOAR EXPANSE!

Could you do a video discussing how perfect the title sequence is? In just a minute it established a world, shows you it’s history and much more without a single word. And as the seasons go on it changes to show different locations and themes.

Not gonna lie, I mostly just came here to find out why a chicken sandwich showed when I hovered my cursor over the thumbnail.

PLEASE DO VIDEOS ON: Top 10 Standard Issue Infantry Firearms in Sci-Fi. Top 10 Post Apocalyptic Nations and Factions. Everything Wrong with the Battle of Hogwarts.

Gotta say, now I really want a wendy's spicy chicken sandwich. Well, the whole meal

Duuude. This one blew my mind. Very philosophical and introspective. Don't know if your other videos are like that, but this is the first one I've seen that hit home. Your observation about the necessity of tension and how that helps us in moving forward and from becoming complacent is gold. I would add that while this applies at a macro level for us as a species, it does at an individual level as well. For example, striving towards a utopia can be considered equivalent to striving for perfection. Which can also be stressful and counterproductive. Instead, it's just easier to accept the daily struggles we have as a part of reality and the human condition and strive to make the best of what we have.

Videos like this make a future of a vast human colonization of planets hard to hope for because we are still stuck in our ways, great video.

Thanks for the video, Ben- I really enjoy your content on this channel, as it’s usually pretty thought-provoking, while retaining a good amount of humor. The issues that you bring up and explore are just on a higher level than you’ll find on most of KZfaq. Honestly, even though I’m subscribed to maybe 100 or so channels, this is the one I really look forward to receiving a “new video notification” from every day. Thanks again for the quality episodes- looking forward to your next one. 👍🏻

I postulate l that a common goal with more lateral conflict (who will reach this goal first) rather than direct conflict (oppositional views or resentments) work WAY better to achieving a goal. Like when we were in a race against Russia to be the first to land on the moon. It was a common goal that created progress without the risk of war. Kind of like how the protomolecule (and subsequently the ring) helped to slow tensions and how being trapped within ring space eventually made all involved to power down their ships. A common goal or enemy tends to unite factions.

The amount of time dedicated to spicy chicken sandwiches is mildly uncomfortable. Everyone knows nuggets are the superior chicken delivery system.

"the subconscious mind tricks it user that complete agreement whereby there is no conflict and everyone is in complete agreement, everything is in a state of harmony, this is the idea of utopia" - 4:20 this is the flawed premise his whole argument is based off of.

This argument is reminiscent of the relationship between Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia in Orwell's 1984.

Utopia - A place that doesn't exist James Moore

👏👏👏👏👏👏Ben, this was one of your top10 videos. excellent point. Especially how the tension itself is not 'evil' but that it is the balancing and binding force between entities. if the tension is unchecked, it is disruptive. the tension is checked when one entity seeks out the other to squelch it. Each entity is stronger and wiser for it. i.e. A wind storm may make a tree swing wildly and it may look like the wind might break the tree but the wind is only making the tree stronger and its roots deeper.

Counterpoint, system wide castastrophe has nearly struck at least once per season since the show started heavily based on the inability of the three powers to communicate effectively and sincerely and deal equally with each other. A degree of tension is, probably good. But perpetual tension at the levels seen throughout the Expanse is unsustaistanable as somebody is eventually going to oopsie themselves over the red line. Likewise, having descenters and critics means little if you either can ignore them, or as the belt has learned to its perpetual misfortune, crush them under superor military might.

Whilst I generally agree with your assessment of the political tensions in the Expanse, I would suggest that the predominant underlying conflict in the story is between bad actors and the population at large. There are few characters in the story that actively want conflict or even tension, predominantly everyone wants their own piece of peace in the universe, but with the system set as it is, bad actors can exploit it for their own gain. This is repeated at a micro and macro level throughout the story, and our heroes are almost always the peacemakers acting on behalf of the masses rather than the figureheads exercising their perceived power. I view through my own lense obviously, but what I see, just as in Star Trek, is a reasonably subtle advocation for socialist ideas for the benefit of all. Thanks for talking about the Expanse :)

I'd like a Wendy's Spicy Chicken sandwich, hold the protomolecule!

So basically two bullies and their groups are fighting over control of the school, and the kids they stole lunch money from are giving them both the finger Also damn expanse, you go way deeper than I already was starting to get a bad headache

Is it odd that my utopia is simply a world where everyone has the ability to pursue their goals with minimal collateral harm, and/or unnecessary interference

Another great one. Thanks!

I love how The Expanse shows nobody knows what's going on but and so are always trying to guess what the other person is doing and get it wrong all the time.

Great point of view and criticism about utopias! Really adds to how I view the expanse series and much more :)

Great video and solid points on the principles of the dynamic political conflict! Conflict in its various forms is the healthiest of processes for the animal that is human while being the most organic system of our development. Conflict alongside its natural associate of tension is what allows us to lead ourselves to the truest evolution possible. While it isn't the most glamourous of concepts in comparison to Utopia, in its natural embrace of chaos it is the most beautiful and amazing element to see in our entertainment.

Good video and vary good points and to add a Utopia to me is any society that everyone or most can feel comfortable in it. Like in my first book(Der's Story life and war in the 2040s) there are 5+ Utopias that cater to different ideals where all but one work together but still have tension. It is the only way I could think of to have a Utopian society is just to let people pick their favorite and live there like states and counties today.

This video can be sold as a understanding of the Sith code.

This is probably one of the most intelligent assessments of the human condition I have ever heard. Chapeau, Monsieur!

As a former Wendy’s employee who loves the Spicy Chicken Sandwich(with zesty honey mustard instead of mayo and pickles instead of tomato) this made me smile

I watched this on Nov 4 2020. Very timely.

Galaxy brain American Ben over here with an enlightened take on solar system conflict. Bravo.

Wow!!! Bravo!! Well said!!

Brilliant analysis!

This is why I love this channel.

Excellent

I finally finished Th4e Expanse, so I can finally watch all your vids without fear of spoilers.

And now Wendy's spicy chicken sales have increased 20% for today.

Enjoyed your video as always. May all your political power struggles be democratic, and may all your wars be cold.

Great video for the morning

"Human mecha..." that made my day XD

At the risk of sounding a little too political, this is why I like American politics, in general. The Democrat and Republicans, the liberals and conservatives, and the various other parties competing ideologies allows us to have a balanced system where the most radical of either side is kept in check. Though this does rely on healthier dialogue then seems to be taking place right now.

A philosophy lesson using The Expanse. I like it.

Wow. Very deep. Nice.

Someone was having fun with a thesaurus recently. (great way to lean new words tbh)

I love the show for what it is.. visual, interesting and Awesome. What you’re saying is or might be on point... but I love the show and cast and how it’s developing.

Arguments of this video as I understood them: 1) That perfect harmony in society can only be accomplished with uniformity of thought 2) Uniformity in thought is inherently tyrannical 3) Differences of opinion create conflict 4) Conflict between groups of people (groups in this context including anything from states, to religious groups, to class divides within a state, etc.) drives innovation and progress 5) THEREFORE: Perpetual conflict between different groups of people (whether within the state or external to the state) is desirable to drive innovation, progress, and to prevent the tyranny of uniform thought. This argument is valid. If you accept the premises (1 - 4) then you will accept the conclusion (5). Entire political philosophies exist centered on the idea that humans are predisposed to conflict and our natural state of being is to always be in conflict with some other group of beings too weak to destroy us but to strong to be crushed overnight. But I'm going to attack the premises because I take issue with them: 1) I reject the idea that a difference of opinion inherently creates conflict. There are limits of course (if one group believes it has the right to exist, and another group rejects that, these are two ideas that cannot coexist without tension and often violence), but I would contend that it is very possible for competing ideas to exist in a tension-less harmony. The only ideas that cannot coexist with others are ideas that inherently demand the removal of competing ideas. Atheism and theism, for instance, do not necessarily need to be in tension as there is no practical point of tension between the two views. They might contest one another on the nature of reality, but there is nothing about a belief in God or a lack of belief in God that by itself demands interference or interrogation with the other group (note I use theism in a broad sense as specific religious traditions do conflict with atheists and I will not erase that). If you cannot handle the existence of ideas contrary to your own without experiencing stress or tension I'd call that a personal problem and not human nature. 2) Conflict between groups of people is simply one form of conflict that exists. Sure, computers were created in war, but vaccines were created due to conflict between mankind and nature. Furthermore, this particular example took steps to ameliorate that conflict yet did not see a reduction in innovation or progress in fighting disease. Conflict in general does drive progress if you view conflict as any occasion where what a person or group of people wants and what is real do not match up. Conflict between groups of people is simply one of many possible conflicts and it can actually be regressive at times (leading me to point 3). 3) Conflict does not inherently drive progress. It usually does but it can also retard progress depending on the nature of the conflict and the interests at play. A prominent real life example is the conflict between moneyed interests in the energy sector and the science of climate change retards progress in addressing climate change, as scientists spend limited resources doing studies that show yes it's still happening and yes it's still manmade that could be better spent on coming up with solutions. The only premise I can really see as being true is "uniformity of thought is inherently tyrannical", which is not enough to hold up the conclusion.

The way this video sumerised the conflict between earth Mars and belt reminded me of 1984 and Oceania , Eurasia and Eastasia. Except in 1984 the war is just used to keep resources and people depleted and doesnt drive innovation. I guess the issue with tension on a large scale results in such a loss of resources

Good analysis.

I partially agree, but I don't think "extreme" is the right measure of something being necessarily avoided, since many things that are seen as normal today were seen as extreme not too long ago, e.g. women's suffrage. What is seen as normal may be contingent and very historically specific, and there may be sudden unforeseen changes in the world situation that make old ways impossible (e.g. the Expanse's appearance of the ring gates). The right idea though is that you need a balance of power and a free flow of ideas.

An easy way of bringing people together is to introduce a threat from outside. This is why the entirety of Earth joined together in Starblazers 2199 against the Alien Threat. You should watch and review that show; you will be glad you did.

So what you are saying is... Purge the vegans for their heresy so we can achieve perfection? ;)

0:31 - what movie is that exploring spaceship taken from ... it does not look familiar to me at all?

Well this was needlessly complicated. The political conflict is a pretty straightforward allegory for real-world geopolitics. The UN/Earth represents the US, MCR/Mars represents the Soviet Union, or possibly China depending on how you read it, and the Belt represents the third world/global south. The shift in the political conflict in seasons 4 and 5 of the Expanse suggests that Mars is meant to represent the Soviet Union, with the defeated, corrupt Mars representing the west's perception of the modern-day Russian Federation. The conflict between the Inner Planets and Marco Inaros represents the current era of repurposing old Cold War hardware and infrastructure for a forever war against any and all global south autonomy (branded as "the war on terror").

Missed you guys yesterday.

well said.

I have to say, I find this train of thought a bit incoherent. First the main point, how is The Expanse's conflict misunderstood, is it that it people believe it is a bad one but are mistaken for doing so? Or is this video attempting to argue that it is actually... good? It isn't clearly or explicitly stated but neither is any other point so I guess it is the closest conclusion. That conflict is inherent in humanity is true but also obvious and a shallow assertion of fact and in any case isn't really expanded upon anyway. I don't see the connection between tyrannical oppression and unity of thought nor is it really expanded upon either when I'd argue they're almost opposites, since unity of thought negates the need for any oppression. But most importantly, I'd argue, is the gross simplification that without international (or in this case, interplanetary) political conflict, no inter-personal conflicts at all can exisist, ergo no tensions and no drive for progress. However it is shown, quite explicitly to in fact be a hindrance or obstacle towards progress in the show, not to mention in the real world. Here, the least conflicted global areas are the most progressives by almost every measurable static.

I'll never forget when Bobby makes it to the ocean, gazes as at it and it's just filthy, just floating chemicals and trash.

Without something to overcome, there is no growth.

Don't forget the spicy nuggets...those are also ambrosia. Oh, and nice take on the need for equilibrium between powers/forces...and the fine line we walk between various forms of tyranny(imbalance). Star Wars hints at this with the force needing to be in balance.

This is some deep philosophy, it is also correct. Competition is a fundamental part of human nature.

I don't think of utopia is as much a lack of conflict, but rather a universal acceptance of non violent and rational means of resolving conflict.

The Earth-Mars conflict was started in large part because Mars wanted sovereignty. Earth found a problem that has played out again and again and *doesnt need to*. Civil wars are fought over this, leaders are arrested by the ‘winner’, people die, and things often go back to a status quo. The US Civil War is an obvious example but a more modern one would be the recent attempt by Catalonia to separate from Spain. Sometimes the issues are material but sometimes its mostly just a matter of asserting dominance. Perhaps utopia is impossible to be reached but a level of understanding needs to be achieved so nations can exist and their peoples feel free and unafraid of being killed in a civil war while they were just going to work. I appreciate your understanding of how the US government is supposed to work but right now THAT sounds utopian. 😭

1:12 Londres Nova. That's the capital of Mars.

Very deep and cerebral analysis and conclusion. I wonder if the author read that from another source, or if he reach to that thinking by himself. Congratulations, anyway.

And I can't help but think this video perfectly describes what's happening currently...in our world.

Was in my truck watching this video thinking what I want for food thought of wendys and then bam!!! Spicy chicken sandwich. I k where I'm going

The most absurd thing about The Expanse is the planet-wide governments. Realistically, not even continent-wide governments can work. People in different places have different cultures, languages, they're separated by geography, and just overall have priorities so different that if anyone attempted to unify them, even if they actually succeeded, they'd be unable to function unless one group successfully subdued the others. The colonization of the expanse would look like the European age of conquest, with rival powers within Earth grabbing up as much territory in other planets as they can to prevent other powers outflanking them. Eventually these outer-space colonies will demand self government and either be commonwealth nations like the former British empire or they'll just break away. So, Earth will still be divided into nations, and so will the other planets.

who is the head of MCRN? We always knows the leaders for both OPA & UNN but I've never seen the top heads for MCRN

war is war, destruction is destruction. war is not destruction, destruction is not war. when two entities are at an impasse conflict ensues. when those entities have enough people and resources that conflict becomes war. even in war destruction should be avoided, thus a system which allows for war without destruction becomes ideal. conflict can be avoided with enough resources and freedom, though conflict breeds innovation and shows us our flaws. therefore a world without conflict is a world that does not innovate or improve itself.

Haven't seen the expanse and dont mind the spoilers. When you closed with your assessment of the 'health' of the system in The Expanse/Real World: reminded me of the original Jed'ii order before the advent of the Jedi and The Sith, which brought imbalance to the force. This is why im with Alan on his views of the Sith, but I also empathize with Eckhartsladder. I appreciate both. Humans require systems with tension, friction, and conflict to advance. Learned this in the USAF and F500 companies lol. (Could be a good video Idea for GenTech, Alan) Look at World War 2. Look at Magellan's Voyage. Look at Valley Forge. Look at the Hot Gates. Look at the Pandemic. Look at the Stock Market. What do you see besides the noise from the mainstream media?

“Stillness equals stagnation, stagnation equals death.” Nitsche

Hey does anyone here know how to actually edit videos? I have a few video editors but all I can figure out how to do is combine mp3s, images and mp4s, then clip them and cut them. But I don’t know how to actually edit things onto videos, such as words or different special effects. Can anyone help lead me in the right direction? Thank you :)

I don't think you know what the definition of Tyranny is, it is not everyone thinking the same thing, that is Consensus, Tyranny is a cruel and oppressive rule. Now Consensus can be achieved through Tyranny though it rarely maintains it for long.

If i may nit-pick here. Utopia means non-place, it's a place you can't arrive, you can only wish for it, at because as soon you are there, it's no longer a non-place therefore it's not utopia anymore....

Checks and balances...avoiding too much power in too few hands

Bad title , should not me "misunderstood" rather summery of Expanse and my personal thoughts on political philosophy

I believe that there is an inherent fallacy of this thinking. On one hand it is true about the “check and balances”. On the other hand it is the status not the ideal. Look- there will be never a time, where all people are having the same opinion. This isn’t utopia (or dystopia, depending how you see it - and if the same opinion comes from within or from manipulation etc.). However I think the biggest problem with this thinking is, that conflict has to be inevitable solved with violence. The idea of Gene Roddenberry (on earth) is a society which abandoned a direct currency, harsh capitalism, exploitation and so on. Humanity thrived slowly towards a better future. And should for sure grow further. Does it mean, that everyone has the same opinion? No. Does it mean, that nobody should be left behind and that poverty, war and exploitation should be at an end? For sure.

What we learned is that such tension is destructive case in point cold war. just like in expanse one wrong decision could mean end of humanity. That is not system in balance it is at its breaking point.

Congratulations. You are now Druid. I have to admit you came close to stunning me. I didn't think you had it in you. But this piece... Yeah. I am impressed. You are Druid.

I really liked the political explanation, as it matches my own. I view disagreement as integral to progress and moderation. . As few people are going to point out flaws in thinking/argument better than those who disagree with you. This is also why one of my favorite ways to learn is through debates. I also find that one of the stronger motivators for researching facts, is the fear of getting your getting you ass kicked in a future debate. Also in the debate, you reap the benefits of learning through the other person's research as well. As the reality is that nobody can do all the research by themselves, especially if you don't know where to look; so your opponent condensing their own research or pointing you where to look, is always a great boon. . The mitigating factor is also extremely important. If there is no resistance, one group can runaway into a stagnated tyranny. Whether that be political or academic tyranny. As such I view having diversity of ways of thinking as very important in society.

When the Wendy's #6 is mentioned in tandem with utopia, I know I am home.

I can help but constantly think about what humanity should or would do in the wake a ring system. If we ventured into it fractured we will he forcer fractured as a species. But if we venture into it as a single human civilization, we could expand into the stars as a single united speices. Its like a monumental fork in the road that would dictate the entire development of a intersteler civilization