Talk:Nanosocialism

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2019 and 3 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Smosmores. Peer reviewers: Smosmores.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Opening statement

 * Nanosocialism is a stance that favors state intervention to create and regulate molecular nanotechnology.

Equating socialism with state intervention is a right-wing argument used against socialism. I've read the relevant reference for this page and I can't really see where the author advocates state intervention. Damburger 09:52, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Although I understand what you mean, there are left-wingers who equate socialism with state intervention. The previous opening statement was based on the following paragraph from James Hughes' essay The Politics of Transhumanism: “David Berube is an example of a transhumanist who has worked out some of the implications for transhumanism of corporate control in his essays on “Nanosocialism” (Berube, 1996). Berube argues that socialist intervention would be required to create a full-featured nanotechnology since capitalist firms cannot be expected to develop a technology which would make households independent of their goods, and the market altogether. Secondly, the threat of malicious or accidental use of nanotechnology is so grave that strong state intervention would be required to ensure safe and secure use. Third, Berube repeats the post-work/guaranteed minimum wage argument. He argues that nanotech would destroy the market economy as we know it, along with the necessity to work.”


 * That being said, I've edited the opening to more accurately reflect the views of Berube. --Loremaster 20:17, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * "Socialist intervention" seems seperate from "State intervention" in his sentence, but I'll let it stand for now as I can't think of a non-clumsy way to express that in the article. Damburger 22:18, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I disagree. "Socialist intervention" and "strong state intervention", which are expressions both used in the paragraph above, are meant to be synonymous. --Loremaster 22:37, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I also notice you seem to have removed the link to post-scarcity. As I see it, post-scarcity features fairly prominently in this guys ideas so I'm going to find a way to re-add it. Damburger 22:18, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm OK with that. --Loremaster 22:37, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion
User:Jrtayloriv has proposed the Nanosocialism article for deletion arguing that it is a non-notable neologism. I suggest redirecting to the Regulation of nanotechnology article. --Loremaster (talk) 03:09, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

What is Infosocialism?
I think there should be a definition of what this is. It assumes we all know. Geeknpink (talk) 17:13, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

What is needed to complete this article
The existing article contains a short synopsis of the beliefs of Nanosocialism and a small section on how it appears in popular culture. This small amount of data suggests that this is why it is classified as a stub-class article. Firstly, the Politics section must be expanded to contain details about the belief system, possibly including differences and similarities to other types of socialism. I also suggest a separate section on the founder of Nanosocialism and their life. This will give context to the ideas they presented. Furthermore, the article should explore the scope of the belief: where has it been implemented in the world? What were its successes and failures? Ideologies that oppose Nanosocialism should also be included, as that would provide a more complete understanding of the ideology itself. The section In popular culture is lacking the evidence needed to make the article applicable to everyday life. Any examples of Nanosocialism, whether named or not, should be included, as this will provide readers with other resources to examine. Overall, the article is lacking historical evidence or examples, which are crucial to a complete understanding of the topic. Expansion is needed in the already-existing sections of this article, but more so than that, additional information is crucial to the completeness of this document. Oliviaaagrace (talk) 15:44, 13 February 2024 (UTC)