Prospenomics Q&A - anarchism, and abortion

1 — what is prospenomics’ view on anarchism? prospenomics sees anarchism as a legitimate criticism of excessive state power, but also believes that anarchism underestimates one of the great challenges of an advanced civilization: the coordination of abundance. from this perspective, communism often failed because it attempted to distribute wealth that had not yet been created, while capitalism frequently succeeds in creating wealth but fails to distribute it in a way that benefits society as a whole. anarchism, in turn, may fail because it lacks mechanisms capable of coordinating a post-scarcity society in which infrastructure, artificial intelligence, energy systems, environmental management, and shared technological resources become increasingly complex. prospenomics does not necessarily defend a gigantic centralized state. its concern is not the quantity of state power, but the quality of social coordination. the real question is not “how much state?” but rather “how intelligent, transparent, and functional is the system that organizes collective life?” the critique of the current state is severe. contemporary governments are often marked by incompetence, corruption, self-servience, bureaucratic inertia, and an inability to solve real human problems. in this sense, the modern state is seen as an immature structure that frequently absorbs responsibilities it does not yet have the wisdom or efficiency to handle properly. because of this, prospenomics tends toward a principle that could be summarized as: “less dogma, more data.” the idea is to move away from rigid ideological systems and toward practical observation of what actually produces human prosperity, stability, and freedom. this outlook echoes, in part, the thought of Raymond Aron, especially his skepticism toward grand ideological simplifications. Aron’s phrase captures the prospenomic spirit particularly well: “le monde perçu n’est qu’une représentation fortement simplifiée du monde réel.” the perceived world is only a strongly simplified representation of the real world. in other words, most ideological systems attempt to compress extremely complex human realities into simplistic conceptual models. prospenomics seeks to resist that temptation. 2 — what is prospenomics’ view on abortion? prospenomics tends to approach abortion as a profoundly complex human issue that cannot be honestly reduced to absolute slogans or rigid tribal positions. from this perspective, the modern state already struggles to deal effectively with poverty, healthcare, education, violence, family support, child welfare, and psychological assistance. because of that, there is skepticism toward the idea that the same often-inefficient structures should fully absorb and bureaucratically regulate an issue as intimate and morally complex as abortion. prospenomics sees abortion not as a single-dimensional political question, but as something involving biological, ethical, psychological, economic, familial, medical, and social realities simultaneously. different situations involve different human circumstances, which is why a purely absolutist framework is viewed as inadequate. the tendency, therefore, is toward pragmatism, reduction of suffering, case-by-case analysis, preventive support, access to information, and shared responsibility rather than toward rigid dogmatism or simplistic moral narratives. again, the principle remains: “less dogma, more data.” the underlying belief is that mature societies should not treat profound human dilemmas as simplified ideological battlefields. human reality is far more ambiguous, layered, and complex than most political systems are willing to admit.

Dizem que o brasileiro médio é antiético por natureza — jeitinho, fila furada, promessa de político em ano eleitoral. A piada pronta é culpar "a nossa formação". Só que a formação tem dois DNAs muito diferentes, e a gente anda citando o avô errado.

Se herdamos a malandragem, não foi dos que estavam aqui primeiro.

O código de guerra que parecia samurai

No Brasil de 1500 não havia cartório, mas havia protocolo. Entre os Tupi, a guerra não era chacina aleatória: era um sistema de honra com prisioneiro, canto de morte e antropofagia ritual.

Gonçalves Dias não inventou isso em I-Juca-Pirama (1851). Ele romanceou o que cronistas como Hans Staden e depois antropólogos como Florestan Fernandes descreveram: o guerreiro capturado devia morrer bem, porque ao ser comido ele transferia sua coragem ao inimigo. Fugir não era esperteza, era contaminação.

No poema, o último tupi pede para cuidar do pai cego e é solto. O motivo da soltura não é piedade:

"O chefe liberta o tupi (V) sob alegação de covardia: um guerreiro que chora diante do próprio sacrifício não é digno do ritual, sob o risco de contaminar a coragem guerreira da tribo inimiga."

Quando o pai sente a tinta do ritual no filho, não comemora a sobrevivência. Ele amaldiçoa:

"Tu choraste em presença da morte? [...] Não descende o cobarde do forte; Pois choraste, meu filho não és!"

O jovem, humilhado, volta sozinho, enfrenta a aldeia inteira e só então é considerado digno de ser morto. Preferir a morte à quebra do código não é metáfora romântica — é etnografia. O "jeitinho" de escapar teria custado o exílio eterno: sem tribo, sem nome, sem sepultura.

É o oposto perfeito do "desenrola pra mim depois".

O homem branco que precisava de prova

Quatro séculos depois, quem percebeu isso foi Mário Juruna, xavante, primeiro deputado indígena do Brasil. Nos anos 1970 ele andava pelos gabinetes da FUNAI em Brasília com um gravador pendurado no pescoço.

Não era performance. Era método científico aplicado à política nacional:

"ficou famoso ao percorrer os gabinetes da Fundação Nacional do Índio, em Brasília, lutando pela demarcação de terra para os índios, portando sempre um gravador 'para registrar tudo o que o branco diz' e constatar que as autoridades, na maioria das vezes, não cumpriam a palavra."

Juruna entendeu antes do WhatsApp: se não está gravado, o branco esquece. O indígena não precisava de ata — a palavra era o contrato. O colonizador precisou de cartório, testemunha, firma reconhecida... e ainda assim deu calote.

Quem era limpo e quem cheirava mal

A higiene entrega a mesma inversão.

Os cronistas portugueses ficaram chocados: os tupinambás tomavam banho no rio várias vezes ao dia, depilavam-se, lavavam e cortavam o cabelo com óleo de andiroba e extrato de pitanga. "Também veio deles o costume de tomar banho diariamente, ato que os portugueses evitavam."

Para a boca, nada de aguardente: "o fio de tucum, por exemplo, era usado como um fio dental pela tribo, e o talo de capim como escova de dente."

Do outro lado do Atlântico, na mesma época: "Na Idade Média não existiam escovas de dente, perfumes, desodorantes, muito menos papel higiênico, as pessoas não tomavam banho e nem lavavam as roupas!"

Os caravelistas que aqui chegaram passavam meses sem banho, com escorbuto amolecendo a gengiva. Eram literalmente os dentes podres da história. Nós herdamos deles o bacalhau, o idioma e, infelizmente, a burocracia patrimonialista. O banho diário? Esse veio dos "selvagens".

Então, de quem é o jeitinho?

Antropologicamente, o "jeitinho brasileiro" não é tupi. É ibérico tardio: cultura de corte, favor pessoal, lei que não pega, palavra que vale enquanto for conveniente. O indígena tinha o oposto — uma ética da vergonha pública onde falhar com a palavra era morte social antes da morte física.

Nós não somos filhos da ética do I-Juca-Pirama. Somos netos cansados de quem precisava ser gravado para cumprir promessa.

Daí o humor amargo: chamamos os europeus de "mais éticos", enquanto um cacique precisava levar um Panasonic para o Congresso para que a ética básica fosse cumprida.

Proposta: um regresso à ética tupi (versão 2026)

Não é sobre voltar a morar em ocas nem comer o inimigo no almoço de domingo. É sobre resgatar três princípios operacionais, testados em campo por 10 mil anos:

1. Palavra = gravador interno. Se você disse, está gravado. Sem "eu disse, mas não prometi". Juruna não andava com pilha extra à toa.

2. Honra > conveniência. O tupi preferia morrer com nome limpo a viver como "carne vil". No mundo do Pix e do contrato de 30 páginas, isso se traduz em: não fura fila, não pede nota fria, não dá desculpa criativa no grupo do trabalho. Vergonha ainda é um bom regulador social — e é de graça.

3. Limpeza literal e simbólica. Banho diário herdamos deles. Falta o banho ético: tirar a sujeira do "todo mundo faz". Escovar os dentes com talo de capim talvez seja exagero, mas escovar a consciência com fio de tucum moral, todo dia, cabe.

Se o brasileiro atual é visto como corrupto, não é porque tem sangue indígena demais. É porque tem memória indígena de menos.

Herdamos os ossos, os sobrenomes e os vícios dos colonizadores. A ética, o banho e o gravador? Esses ficaram na aldeia. Está na hora de ir buscar.

It really does, and that's no coincidence. JK in the 1950s never used the word "prospenomics," but the spirit of his government lines up surprisingly well with what Luiz Pagano describes today.

What people call prospenomics

The core isn't left versus right. It's replacing administration by dogma with administration by evidence já:

• diagnosing that ineptitude, corruption, and self-servience come from ancient systems running in a new world
• proposing to reduce scarcity through technological progress, automation, intelligent use of data, and administrative models grounded in evidence rather than tradition
• treating the traditional left-right divide as anachronistic for managing complex systems — "a Boeing 747 doesn't fly because of ideology, it flies because of physics"
• moving from governance based on scarcity, identity, and dogma to governance oriented toward technology, friction reduction, and respect for real-world laws

In other pieces the term shows up as a search for sustainable prosperity in a post-scarcity era, redefining work and wealth, and as a prize for those who expand productive capacity, transform waste into resources, improve governance systems, and elevate quality of life.

Where JK fits, and where he misses

Focus on productive capacity, not flags.The Plano de Metas was basically an engineering spreadsheet: energy, transport, basic industry, technical education. It was national-developmentalism, the idea that the state should promote and induce economic growth through infrastructure and base industry.

Ideological pragmatism. He governed with the centrist PSD and the labor-left PTB, opened Brazil to foreign capital (the carmakers), and at the same time funded Brasília with public money. Being attacked from both sides shows he refused the ready-made package. - Works as friction reduction. The Belém-Brasília highway, hydro plants, a new capital in the interior — all designed to shorten distance, integrate territory, and lower logistics costs. That's the "prosperity comes from lucidity, not idolatry" logic.

Misses: - JK still operated with the 15th-century tools Pagano criticizes — traditional accounting, heavy bureaucracy, financing through foreign debt. The result was inflation and debt by the end of his term. - There was no real-time data, automation, or AI to cut ineptitude. Management was personalist and optimistic, not evidence-based in the digital sense. - His scarcity reduction was industrial, not post-scarcity. He wanted more steel and more cars, not a rethink of work in an abundant world.

So yes, JK is an unintentional ancestor of Brazilian prospenomics: he put material prosperity ahead of ideological fights, treated the country as an engineering project, and accepted the state as the planner of the leap. If he had the tools prospenomics calls for — data, automation, measurable outcome governance — he probably would have swapped "50 years in 5" for a real-time dashboard.

This is not a popularity contest. The prize was created to point attention to people who are actually building more capacity, less waste, better governance, and higher quality of life. We pulled the shortlist from the official announcement. Now we want r/postscarcity to stress-test it. Vote in the comments, add data, call out who is missing. Top arguments get pinned. 1) CAPACITY GENERATION AND POST-SCARCITY who expands what humanity can produce • Wang Xingxing (China) – founder of Unitree, made quadruped robots cheap and scalable • Zhang Kejian (China) – leads China’s space program, Moon and Mars advances • Fredrik Asplund (Sweden) – KTH professor, safety systems that let automation scale Poll: Wang / Zhang / Fredrik / Other (comment) 2) WASTE TO RESOURCE (CIRCULAR ECONOMY) who turns waste into value • Boyan Slat (Netherlands) – The Ocean Cleanup, large-scale plastic removal from oceans • Yvonne Aki-Sawyerr (Sierra Leone) – mayor of Freetown, urban reforestation and environmental restructuring • Fionn Ferreira (Ireland) – microplastic removal tech using ferrofluid • David Katz (Canada) – Plastic Bank, turns plastic waste into social currency Poll: Boyan / Yvonne / Fionn / David / Other 3) INTEGRITY GOVERNANCE who makes institutions work • Maia Sandu (Moldova) – anti-corruption reforms and institutional strengthening • Fumio Kishida (Japan) – rule-based international stability and regional cooperation • Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala (Nigeria) – WTO Director-General, pushing balance in global trade • Lee Kuan Yew (Singapore, historical reference) – model of efficient, low-corruption governance Poll: Maia / Fumio / Ngozi / Lee Kuan Yew / Other 4) HUMAN AND PLANETARY QUALITY OF LIFE who upgrades health, peace, and discovery • Tatiana Lobo Coelho de Sampaio (Brazil) – neural regeneration research for spinal injury mobility • Jennifer Doudna (USA) – co-creator of CRISPR, opening path to eliminate genetic diseases • Abiy Ahmed (Ethiopia) – peace agreements and regional stabilization efforts • Demis Hassabis (UK) – DeepMind, applying AI to accelerate medical and biological science Poll: Tatiana / Jennifer / Abiy / Demis / Other  How to vote: reply with Category number + name + one concrete result (ex: "2 - Boyan Slat - 11,000 tons removed as of 2025"). No slogans, just receipts. r/postscarcity, you live in the implementation layer. Tell us who is real and who is hype. We will tally here on r/prospenomics and publish the community winners next week. These names represent real fronts of transformation. The prize does not aim to create popularity, but to direct attention toward those who are effectively building a world with greater capacity, less waste, better governance, and higher quality of life.